Something about Conservatives bothers me

[KafirChobee]

One set of my Grandparents were Republicans, though I never heard either of them classify themselves a conservatives - I did hear them call themselves liberal thinkers (as in could think for themselves). They both voted the solid Republican ticket (remember the "I Like Ike" buttons), always - 'til 1972 (after my Granddads death) my GrandMa voted for the loser, McGovern (other wise it was Republicans). Why one might ask after 40+ years did a sweet old lady vote against her masters? Simply, she smelled something, and rather than deny it .. she accepted it and went where Jesus (as she told me) told her to go.

Now, what bothers me about the new "supposed" conservatives is that they have given up all their ideals, (State rights, individual rights, tax freedom for the poor and the church, feedom of religion, seperation of church and state) for the present premise that what is good for the very wealthy is good for all of us. That it is good to seperate the little people from their money and give it to the wealthiest. That it is an American ideal to better the wealthy and deprive the poor. That it is in the constitution that might makes right and it is the damnedable judges keeping us from achieving this goal of the forfounders.
That putting the Middle class indebt to save the wealthy from paying their fair share is somehow a good thing - OK, were I a part of that society I might root it on (then again, I have a conscience).

What I wonder, is why do conservatives fall for a "one" issue idiomitri? Why, believe that things are totally right or wrong? Where is the grey? Where is the philosophy beyond the proclamation of "Jesus"? Or, the thought that there are two sides to the same circle - idea.

Ignoring an idea, does not make it disappear/

What bothers me? Conservative, means trying to uphold the past - maintain. Believing that balances exist in economics, politics, humanism (social accords), religion and (vs) government (you see, religion is suppose to challenge government, not become a part of it .... not in the USA that is). The conservatives were the group that meant to maintain how things were; States' rights, freedom of the indiviidual over governmental control, the freedom of choice was a conservative idea. State's rights was the center of the Republican platform ... er, 'til they took power.

So? What happened? How did Conservative come to mean "going backwards"? Versus, just standing still? Or, that the rights of congress over rides the rights of all? Or, that .....

What does "conservative" really mean today?

I suspect, nothing. It means a justification for any meat head to devulge some abstract and absurd concept that congealed in their prejudicial brain to be expounded and to be use as an excuse or justification for anything the Republican party does - or, that they do. After all, it is a wonderful thing to deny over time, extend work hours, lower the working age (back t0 1900's). and eliminate OSHA. Wondeful, for the corporations that paid for the election.

Still, I am asking a question. What happened? When did conservatives become issue related versus concerned for their nation above the simple issue of this, that or another thing? Can a conservatives buttons be pushed that easily? Aborsion - push the right buttom to live, push the left button for the mother to have a choice. Is it that simple?

Put simply, those that hide behind being a "Conservative" have no idea what a conservative really is, means, or can justify their indulgence in its usage.

Personally, aside from maybe Redleg and a few (well none actually), I haven't seen any true conservatives here. Otherwise, they would be screaming their bloody heads off about Bushy dumping us in debt after the anti-Christ Billy left him with a surplus. Not, what do I know about you new conservative?

So, I ask: What the F' is a new conservative?

I imagine the "rapture" being theie future plan. Their ideal of the future. Please, show me I am ............. in question.

Or, that one of you can present a reasonable arguement.

Aside from pointing out the faults of the accuser. Still, it would be what I expect.

[bmolsson]

The US Republicans are not very conservative this days.....

[Al Khalifah]

I think the difference between the new Conservatives and the old Conservatives is that the new breed are multi-nationalists and the old breed were nationalist. By this I don't mean that new Conservatives are more interested in the other countries welfare, because that wouldn't be true.

The new Conservatives seem to hold the same traditional values on many moral issues as the old. They are pro-life - despite being pro-gun, anti-gay marriage and so on. They also seem to share the opinion that creating a system where those who can create multitudes of wealth for themselves and their family should be allowed to do so free from interference or excesive taxation. The theory being this will inspire everyone to try hard to work towards the same goal - 'The American Dream.'
From what I can observe though, the new Conservatives seem to care even less about what effect this charge to wealth has on those who fail to make it, who can't achieve the American Dream - which is only really possible for a small minority by the very nature of the Dream itself. The old Conservatives seemed to have an interest in the strength of America as a nation however and would retain some interest in the good of its ordinary people, because their continual compliance is required for the maintainance of the stature of the wealthy. The new Conservatives recognise that in today's world where the concept of the nation state is dying out, they need to care less and less about the interests of the ordinary American people, because automation and cheaper foreign labour can maintain the status-quo just as easily as the working class. Hence, much less concern about social iniatives such as health care, schools and tackling poverty.

From my perspective, the New Conservatives are not concerned with the American people because they believe that the idea of the nation state is dying and that there is no point in paying more to tie their means of production to a nation that is less efficient. In other words, "sorry ordinary American Joe, but you're just too expensive a pet to keep for Billy Millionaire."

[Redleg]

Now this is humorous.

and a copy of what Gawain did. Copying is the best form of flattery that anyone can do. I guess Kafir actually worships Gawain from afar.

LOL

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Now this is humorous.

and a copy of what Gawain did. Copying is the best form of flattery that anyone can do. I guess Kafir actually worships Gawain from afar.

LOL.

Well almost copying. You will notice liberals only confuse me where as we actually bother him. Nice to know we get under your skin mate . Does this suggest a basic difference between the way conservatives and liberals look at each other? If so who is more tolerant?

[Al Khalifah]

Does this suggest a basic difference between the way conservatives and liberals look at each other?

Conservatives and Liberals ? I thought we were all part of an autonomous collective.

[Pindar]

Now, what bothers me about the new "supposed" conservatives is that they have given up all their ideals, (State rights, individual rights, tax freedom for the poor and the church, feedom of religion, seperation of church and state) for the present premise that what is good for the very wealthy is good for all of us. That it is good to seperate the little people from their money and give it to the wealthiest. That it is an American ideal to better the wealthy and deprive the poor. That it is in the constitution that might makes right and it is the damnedable judges keeping us from achieving this goal of the forfounders.
That putting the Middle class indebt to save the wealthy from paying their fair share is somehow a good thing - OK, were I a part of that society I might root it on (then again, I have a conscience).

:

I don't think you understand Conservativism.

[PanzerJaeger]

The only thing in this week's rant that held any bearing for me was the big government factor.

I dont like what Bush is doing with excessive spending and government but i for sure will support him with all i can do to keep the left wing nutjobs out of power. They, in the form of the modern democratic party, threaten the very essense of what America stands for at home and in the world.

Mabey if the democrats werent so ultra liberal.. so week.. so amoral.. and actually had a platform i might consider their candidate, but i doubt it. Bush is a good man.. and a hell of a lot better than anything the leftists could produce.

It truly bothered me how close the last election was.. with American security at stake 48% of americans were still convinced to vote pussy. Kudos Miky Moore and Mr. Soros.

[Devastatin Dave]

Now this is humorous.

and a copy of what Gawain did. Copying is the best form of flattery that anyone can do. I guess Kafir actually worships Gawain from afar.

LOL

LOL, so true...
You know what bothers me about liberals, is that they are so ashamed of being liberal they have to copy conservatives to make any sense of their arguements!!! LOL

[KafirChobee]

I don't think you understand Conservativism.

I don't understand Conservatism in todays society, is what I said.

However, as I noted at the end of my "rant?', I didn't expect any one to seriously address the issue, but instead to take the time to either be hauty about liberals - or to take jabs at me. It is the new Republican method of arguement, versus answering a question.

It is easier to dismiss an arguement because it is a "liberal" concept, than to actually address the issue.

Accepting that the bills be passed in favor of the wealthy, for corporations, to limit freedoms and restrict the judicial process are good things? Or a budget that slashes social programs in favor of military projects (+$560 billion directly to the pentagon, +60billion indirectly, over 50% of the national budget), or the proposal to stymie the growth of social security. That the Conservatives cry out, "We must protect the Middle-class", while passing laws that would hinder them from protecting their property from hostile take over (the new bankruptcy laws, amongst others), increase their taxes, limit their growth, allow for their jobs to shipped overseas (without their being compensated with similar paying jobs), decrease their ability to sue for compensation when injured at the work place, and on ... and on and on.

So I ask again - WTF is this New Compassionate Conservativism?

I feel sorry for folks in the top tax bracket! It must be really tough on them."
"Poor corporations! If it's not insider trading, it's pollution."
"Why do people pick on Ann Coulter? She can't help the what she is!"
(from a cartoon titled, "Bleeding-heart Conservative")

[ichi]

I've always wondered the same things Kafir .

To me it seems that since the Reagan days there has been a concerted attempt to polarize the country while simultaneously distract us.

The so-called conservatives are actually promoting a radical social agenda and using divisive and destructive techniques to achieve thier goals.

I hear my office mates listen to Rush in the background on their radios all day, then listen to them as the angrily repeat his rhetoric - almost like they have been programmed subliminally. The radical right uses the term liberal as a pejorative and questions the loyalty, intelligence, and motives of anyone who doesn't agree in lockstep with them. They attack and attack then cry 'foul' if anybody says anything that they don't like.

Many on the left have stooped to similar tactics, but the new right has perfected the art form.

This cannot be good for us, this vicious form of dialogue where we mock and bitterly cotnest each word from the 'other' side.

America should be a land of tolerance, a place open to the ideas of all reasonable men. Yet these attacks by the extremes have the effect of reducing even further the limited interest in politics and civil issues.

Then the media comes along and distracts us. 'Wag the Dog'.

When N Korea launched a missile into the Sea of Japan it got 1/10 the attention of that poor girl who freaked out and ran away to Albuquerque. Corporate scandals, the wasting of our Federal budget, the gutting of environmental and social protections, outrageous health care costs, none of this gets nearly the focus as Micheal Jacksons pedophilia.

One of things I find the most interesting are the crass insults, like 'liberals are so stupid they have to copy conservatives' or 'half of Americans are pussies since they didn't vote for Bush'.

It's a sad thing to see, the loss of something so important and yet so intangible, the loss of a sense being a free American, whose ideas were as important as anyone elses.

Now its Join Us or Else, like we've gone back to the worst days of the Vietnam War.

I opposed many of the most extreme socialist policies of the left, but there is a new 'Political Correctness' and a new socialism, disguised as conservatism.

IMHO its really a shell game. designed to keep us busy while bad things are done in secret. Next time you get gouged at the gas pump due to market manipulation, or the rolling blackouts come as a result of price-fixing, or laws are passed restricting your rights, or your money goes flushing down the toilet to some well-connected contractor, remember ot bitch about the liberals, or whoever it is that you're programmed to hate.

ichi

[ICantSpellDawg]

Then the media comes along and distracts us. 'Wag the Dog'.

When N Korea launched a missile into the Sea of Japan it got 1/10 the attention of that poor girl who freaked out and ran away to Albuquerque. Corporate scandals, the wasting of our Federal budget, the gutting of environmental and social protections, outrageous health care costs, none of this gets nearly the focus as Micheal Jacksons pedophilia.

what the hell are you talking about?
"the media" is an arm of the conservative government?

I opposed many of the most extreme socialist policies of the left, but there is a new 'Political Correctness' and a new socialism, disguised as conservatism.

please explain where the logic is in this. conservatives are new socialists?
are you talking only about the war when you refer to the new "political correctness"?

also - was it you who said that conservatives are pushing a "radical agenda"?

[PanzerJaeger]

One of things I find the most interesting are the crass insults, like 'liberals are so stupid they have to copy conservatives' or 'half of Americans are pussies since they didn't vote for Bush'.

LOL - Youre actually upset about conservative jokes about liberals!

The continued charactor assasination of our president was so much more angry and propagandistic..

www.moveon.org

Tinted glasses anyone?

[Al Khalifah]

Next time you get gouged at the gas pump due to market manipulation

The day Americans start complaining about the price of petrol at the pump with justification is the day hell freezes over.

[Sigurd]

The day Americans start complaining about the price of petrol at the pump with justification is the day hell freezes over.

LOL, exactely...

[Redleg]

The day Americans start complaining about the price of petrol at the pump with justification is the day hell freezes over.

Hell I dont complain about the price of gas - because I understand how its done.

Price of oil
Price of distilling the oil into gasoline and Diesel
Federal Tax
State Tax
County Tax
City Tax

The price of a barrell of oil is a product of supply and demand - futhermore moderated and controled by OPEC. The distilling cost and methods are pretty much universal across the globe - the reason you Europeans pay more is not because of the Price of a barrel of oil or the distilling cost - but because your own governments placing a higher tax then what is done in the United States.

[Don Corleone]

Well, to be fair, with the exception of Norway and the UK, their price of oil is higher as well, because they don't have their own reserves to draw upon.

[Redleg]

Well, to be fair, with the exception of Norway and the UK, their price of oil is higher as well, because they don't have their own reserves to draw upon.

They must rely upon important oil - the price of oil that is set by OPEC is deemed the market value of a barrell of oil by the world - but you might be right there is most likely an import tax implaced on the oil by many nations - but that is just another form of a Federal or national tax.

[Ser Clegane]

Well, to be fair, with the exception of Norway and the UK, their price of oil is higher as well, because they don't have their own reserves to draw upon.

No quite - AFAIK the price for oil is global (also the major oil companies are globally active).

[Al Khalifah]

but because your own governments placing a higher tax then what is done in the United States.

And it helps discourage people in Europe from driving big-inefficient engined cars everyehere. I'd wager the average European probably spends a lot nearer the amount on petrol each year as an American than they might think - due to the big difference in engine efficiencies.

[Sigurd]

This is one of the issues that have my mind in a contradictory state.
The Norwegian in me shrieks at the inequality of petrol prices across the Atlantic.
Here we are producing 3.270.000 barrels a day and using about 200.000 barrels ourselves. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that our petrol prices should compete with the highest in the world.
As Redleg said the cost of buying oil and refine it to petrol is pretty much the same all over the world.
In a nation that have more money than they can spend (no debt), why on earth should they tax something that they sucked out of the seabed and refined on own account.
Unless they want to be THE PIONEER in world environmental issues. Be the good guy that everyone looks up to, so to speak.

On the other hand I am glad the US consumes 20.000.000 barrels a day and only produces 8.840.000 (2nd on world ranking producers) of them themselves because that keeps the oil price up and money in my pocket.
However low oil prices do create a need for new technology and more work for me.

It does create a strange emotion in this patron... insanity?

[ichi]

"the media" is an arm of the conservative government?

The media is increasingly controlled by a few large corporations, which also seem to have an unreasonably large influence on government. It's no coincidence that The Congress recently allowed even more consolidation of media ownership.

My point remains, important news stories that affect us are pushed off the front page by trivia. Our President holds staged shows that the media portrays as town meetings. Nobody has thrown W a hardball question this term.

please explain where the logic is in this. conservatives are new socialists?
are you talking only about the war when you refer to the new "political correctness"?

The USA under the neo-cons (heck, actually the entire world) will be split into the Party Members and the Prols. Masquerading as capitalism is a complex system that favors large corporations by redistributing low and middle class wealth through taxes and credits to the largest and richest.

If that ain't Socialism (dressed up as Capitialism) then what is?

. . . and no, there is a new political correctness. It's just as bad as anything that gays or minorities or feminists or environmentalists are promoted.

The so-called conservatives liberally use government to suppress speech and acts they deem incorrect. What's really funny to me is how after crying foul for so many years the neo-cons went straight for the same sins - doing exactly what they complained about.

ichi

[ICantSpellDawg]

The USA under the neo-cons (heck, actually the entire world) will be split into the Party Members and the Prols. Masquerading as capitalism is a complex system that favors large corporations by redistributing low and middle class wealth through taxes and credits to the largest and richest.

If that ain't Socialism (dressed up as Capitialism) then what is?

socialism: 1)a political theory advocating state ownership of industry 2: an economic system based on state ownership of capital

2)Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

3)The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.





what you have stated is exactly what socialism is not
if you are going to come out and say conservatives are "the bad guys", why not at least have some idea of what bad guys they resemble instead of just calling them the first word that represents bad that comes to mind

why not just call them fat, ugly, murderous, prussian, new jersey, dung beetle, poop, communist, dinosaur, catholic, sasquatch's

those "bad" things have as much to do with modern conservatism as socialism (as far as socialism as a bad thing goes)


if you were going to make an arguement that industries are begining to control the government and centralize their authority over the market - that would be more convincing - but as it goes - that would be close to the OPPOSITE of socialism

and i still dont buy it

***moderators should be moderate in backroom discussions or at least know what they are talking about***

[Pindar]

I don't understand Conservatism in todays society, is what I said.

However, as I noted at the end of my "rant?', I didn't expect any one to seriously address the issue, but instead to take the time to either be hauty about liberals - or to take jabs at me. It is the new Republican method of arguement, versus answering a question.

It is easier to dismiss an arguement because it is a "liberal" concept, than to actually address the issue.

From this reply I take it your post is supposed to be taken as a sincere attempt to engage. Now I would like you to note the above quote with a piece from your initial post:

What does "conservative" really mean today?

I suspect, nothing. It means a justification for any meat head to devulge some abstract and absurd concept that congealed in their prejudicial brain to be expounded and to be use as an excuse or justification for anything the Republican party does - or, that they do.

Now is this an example of sober reflection?

Assuming this is a real attempt to understand: I'm not sure I understand your reference to 'new' vs. 'old' Conservatism. Typically the Conservative movement is seen in terms of the Reagan Revolution starting with his unsuccessful bid for the party nomination in 1976 though the basis of Reagan's policy can be traced to the Goldwater Campaign in 1964. This means the movement is decades old. You did ask about 'Compassionate Conservatism" here:

So I ask again - WTF is this New Compassionate Conservativism?

This is something new. It is a Bush notion of having private social programs and movements (including religious groups) take up more of the burden of tackling social ills than the government proper. This is a fairly narrow focus, so Compassionate Conservatism does not refer to other issues like foreign policy, the Judiciary etc.

Now if you have a question you really want a Conservative to "address the issue" on, put it forward and I'll give you my take. I read you post(s) and the bulk of it seemed, shall we say, rhetorical rather than an actual attempt to engage your opposition as it were.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I have one question for you Ichi. How in the world do you claim to be a Libertarian?

[bmolsson]

"Conservative" and "Liberal" is only other names for "Republicans" and "Democrats" in US. The difference between "Republicans" and "Democrats" are more based on geographical location and favorite baseball team. There are neither any conservatives or liberals in todays US politics. It's only a big gray mish-mash of social democrats. Very similar to what Sweden have after the WWII. Geez, guy's just wait, the worst is still ahead of you.....

[ichi]

what you have stated is exactly what socialism is not
if you are going to come out and say conservatives are "the bad guys", why not at least have some idea of what bad guys they resemble instead of just calling them the first word that represents bad that comes to mind

why not just call them fat, ugly, murderous, prussian, new jersey, dung beetle, poop, communist, dinosaur, catholic, sasquatch's

those "bad" things have as much to do with modern conservatism as socialism (as far as socialism as a bad thing goes)

Please don't put words in my mouth. Had I wanted to say that conservatives are bad, I would have said it. What I did say was that today's breed of neo-cons aren't really conservatives, they're right-wing activists. And yes, some of the things they do worry me.

Second, please don't limit my thought process with your cumbersome mental constraints. To you socialism may connote state-ownership, but that is simply one version - specifically Soviet-style Socialism or Communism. There are many varieties of Socialism, which is better defined as I have done than by thinking in terms of state ownership of resources.

Wikipedia: Socialism

specifically: Note also that while many would say that socialism is defined by state ownership and state planning of the means of production and economic life, a certain degree of such state ownership and planning is common in economies that would almost universally be considered capitalist. In Canada, Crown Corporations are responsible for various sectors of the economy deemed to be of strategic importance to the people (for example power generation). In the U.S., a semi-private central bank with close ties to the federal government, the Federal Reserve, regulates lending rates, serving as a "bank of banks." Also, governments in capitalist nations typically run the post office, libraries, national parks, highways, and (in the case of the US) NASA. Interestingly, though, the federal government's monopoly on space travel from U.S. take-off sites is itself a thing of the past -- as of 2004 (see Ansari X Prize) private capital is entering even that field.

if you were going to make an arguement that industries are begining to control the government and centralize their authority over the market - that would be more convincing - but as it goes - that would be close to the OPPOSITE of socialism

I did make a good argument for this, but that's really easy. Ipso locutor, anybody with eyes can see what's going on. and what I described is a hybrid form of Socialism masquerading as Capitalism where big government uses its authority to keep big business in power.

Didn't you read my post?

and i still dont buy it

***moderators should be moderate in backroom discussions or at least know what they are talking about***

I don't really mind that you don't buy it, but you seem to be really angry that I don't see things your way.

and to be precise, I am an Assistant Moderator, in the Console Forum. Here I am simply another patron, and I try excruciatingly hard to not embarass Tosa or Gregoshi or Barocca or any other authority figures - they've been too kind to me over the years for me to repay them with additional workload.

This rule of yours about being moderate is simply that - a rule of yours. But IMHO I have been moderate, or at least civil, but now you seem to be venturing into the ad hominem zone and talking about me and not the issue.

I respectfully request that you stop focusing on me and how stoopid you think I am and discuss the issue, not me.

Finally, I do know what I'm talking about, the fact that you disagree with me means not that I am ignorant, but that we disagree.

I enjoy our Backroom dialogues, but I'd rather avoid the place than start a fight, so please . . .

ichi

ps @Gawain I believe in minimal government and maximum freedom, most of what the Libertarian Party espouses. My one major difference with most libertarians is that I support a strong government presence in protecting the environment. Its a social cost/benefit thing.

Now lay off ichi and focus on the issue!

[PanzerJaeger]

How is that console game looking Ichi, or should i stop by the console forum to see?

[ichi]

"Conservative" and "Liberal" is only other names for "Republicans" and "Democrats" in US. The difference between "Republicans" and "Democrats" are more based on geographical location and favorite baseball team. There are neither any conservatives or liberals in todays US politics. It's only a big gray mish-mash of social democrats. Very similar to what Sweden have after the WWII. Geez, guy's just wait, the worst is still ahead of you.....

Very Very True

[ichi]

How is that console game looking Ichi, or should i stop by the console forum to see?

E3 is coming up soon and hopefully more info then. I think it may be interesting, but probably not for everybody who has been palying the PC version.

I'm interested in the longterm effects of the devs spreading out into other realms, and Kukri has promised to teach me the finer points of being a postman

ichi