Alright, I Don't Understand, What Is It That Conservatives Want?

[born rich]

I realized the other day

The current brand of Conservatism should be thought of as a New Deal for the wealthy.

Random thoughts.

1) Reagan was incredibly protectionist. People who associate his name with the "Free Market" have been fooled by his speeches and the Norquist driven legacy project.

2) The Cold War & War on Terrorism grew government & the budget more than all Lefty social programs combined. [How do you think the Soviets did it? Fear of domestic and foreign enemies]

3) In the absence of Government Regulations, there grows not a free market, but a centralized cabal of mega-monopolies which wrap their tentacles around the political and doctrinal systems.

3.1) By destroying the Sherman Act, Reagan cleared the way for 30 years of merger-mania, creating an immovable, unaccountable, bureaucratic, corporate monolith that became too big to fail, i.e., big enough to sink the ENTIRE global financial system. [Lifting boats?] If you want to know who paved the way for Socialism -- i.e., a state sponsored business sector -- go back to 1980: the point of the Reagan Revolution was to let Business take over government (this is why he kicked Labor out of Washington and brought in the lobbyists). DeLay's K Street project was nothing more than the creation of a centralized business state. Money for legislation and protection (i.e., bailout insurance). Free Market? Are you kidding me?

4) The New Right is incredibly intrusive. They believe in Big Moral Government and Big Surveillance Government. From Pat Robertson to the Patriot Act, these folks are dangerous: they want government in your bedroom, on your computer, phone calls, and all over your electronic movements/transactions. You can't go phishing for Democratic governors, war protestors, and policy detractors unless you create a larger net. If your policies increase poverty and unrest (by an upward redistribution of wealth), you better grow a Big Law Enforcement State.

5) Welcome to the Dark Ages: Christianity and Big Business unite against Science. Let's face it, if you don't want Government Regulators dredging the Hudson for your PCBs or sniffing around your smoke stack, you better wage war against Science. Why do you think they want a citizenry who believes in the Bible, not the periodic chart. [Study your Leo Strauss. You must drug the masses with fear, religion, and patriotism. You must talk about "evil-doers" not oil geopolitics]

During the hey-day of postwar liberalism (when the economy grew steadily for two and half decades), business was under fire. The words of one of our greatest presidents, Teddy Roosevelt, still resonated: ''the malefactors of great wealth''. We use to keep the cigar smoking fat cat in check. We regulated the flow of capital. Reagan Changed that. He ushered in the era of Gordon Gekko: "Greed is Good". He told us to "trust business". We naively believed that the unregulated profit motive, driven only by "rational" self-interest, would lead to utopia (-you think Karl Marx had some crazy economic theories?) Ronnie, very cynically, created a substitute demon: drugs & sin. This is why he got in bed with the Moral Majority. [Study his personal life: he never went to Church. He let homosexuals sleep together at the white House. Nancy Reagan was a notoriously, anti-Religious astrology buff. Reagan's current loyalists know none of this] Please recall: he was a moderate (Socially) liberal, pro-Abortion Governor of California until he realized the utility of demonology.

While America was worried about homosexuals & Terrorists, Wall Street created a speculative black hole that will destroy generations.

Ronnie's voice can still be heard.

"Trust business. Get government out of the way. Let Wall Street regulate their own risk. They don't need some government bureaucrat looking over their shoulders. Let them innovate! We must, instead, worry about pot smokers & Janet Jackson's breast". We got punk'd.

FYI: the profit motive is the single most common source of criminal activity. Brilliantly, Reagan propogandized it into a Utopian Reflex -- a bastion of Freedom.

We bought it. We took our eyes off the real crooks.

 

[Annie]

I realized the other day

The current brand of Conservatism should be thought of as a New Deal for the wealthy.

Random thoughts.

1) Reagan was incredibly protectionist. People who associate his name with the "Free Market" have been fooled by his speeches and the Norquist driven legacy project.

2) The Cold War & War on Terrorism grew government & the budget more than all Lefty social programs combined. [How do you think the Soviets did it? Fear of domestic and foreign enemies]

3) In the absence of Government Regulations, there grows not a free market, but a centralized cabal of mega-monopolies which wrap their tentacles around the political and doctrinal systems.

3.1) By destroying the Sherman Act, Reagan cleared the way for 30 years of merger-mania, creating an immovable, unaccountable, bureaucratic, corporate monolith that became too big to fail, i.e., big enough to sink the ENTIRE global financial system. [Lifting boats?] If you want to know who paved the way for Socialism -- i.e., a state sponsored business sector -- go back to 1980: the point of the Reagan Revolution was to let Business take over government (this is why he kicked Labor out of Washington and brought in the lobbyists). DeLay's K Street project was nothing more than the creation of a centralized business state. Money for legislation and protection (i.e., bailout insurance). Free Market? Are you kidding me?

4) The New Right is incredibly intrusive. They believe in Big Moral Government and Big Surveillance Government. From Pat Robertson to the Patriot Act, these folks are dangerous: they want government in your bedroom, on your computer, phone calls, and all over your electronic movements/transactions. You can't go phishing for Democratic governors, war protestors, and policy detractors unless you create a larger net. If your policies increase poverty and unrest (by an upward redistribution of wealth), you better grow a big Law Enforcement State.

5) Welcome to the Dark Ages: Christianity and Big Business unite against Science. Let's face it, if you don't want Government Regulators dredging the Hudson for your PCBs or sniffing around your smoke stack, you better wage war against Science. You want a citizenry who believes in the Bible, not the periodic chart. You want scared sheeple cowering beneath an arbitrary Authority, not critical thinkers who are not fooled by the morphing of Bin Laden into Hussein.

In the absence of a strong Government which defends the Public Good, you have a two party state of fear merchants -- each playing the public on behalf of their pay masters.

And yet there's this:

Intelligent Design Theory Shut Out of Vatican Evolution Conference: Discovery Institute

Monday March 9, 2009
Intelligent Design Theory Shut Out of Vatican Evolution Conference: Discovery Institute
By Hilary White and John Jalsevac

ROME, March 9, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Last week's highly publicized Vatican-sponsored conference, "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories," organized to correspond with the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, "shut out" discussion of Intelligent Design theory and biblical creationism, a prominent US research group has alleged.

The President of the Discovery Institute (DI), Bruce Chapman, denounced the conference on the Institute's official blog as a "parade of atheists, agnostics and theistic evolutionists whose common theme is that intelligent design is not science, not theology, nothing at all, really--merely a reactionary sociological phenomenon."

Organizers of the conference admitted to the Associated Press last week that they did indeed purposely exclude proponents of Intelligent Design.

"We think that it's not a scientific perspective, nor a theological or philosophical one," said the Rev. Marc Leclerc, the conference director and a professor of philosophy of nature at the Gregorian, according to the AP. "This makes a dialogue very difficult, maybe impossible."....

 

[Meister]

I realized the other day

The current brand of Conservatism should be thought of as a New Deal for the wealthy.

Random thoughts.

1) Reagan was incredibly protectionist. People who associate his name with the "Free Market" have been fooled by his speeches and the Norquist driven legacy project.

2) The Cold War & War on Terrorism grew government & the budget more than all Lefty social programs combined. [How do you think the Soviets did it? Fear of domestic and foreign enemies]

3) In the absence of Government Regulations, there grows not a free market, but a centralized cabal of mega-monopolies which wrap their tentacles around the political and doctrinal systems.

3.1) By destroying the Sherman Act, Reagan cleared the way for 30 years of merger-mania, creating an immovable, unaccountable, bureaucratic, corporate monolith that became too big to fail, i.e., big enough to sink the ENTIRE global financial system. [Lifting boats?] If you want to know who paved the way for Socialism -- i.e., a state sponsored business sector -- go back to 1980: the point of the Reagan Revolution was to let Business take over government (this is why he kicked Labor out of Washington and brought in the lobbyists). DeLay's K Street project was nothing more than the creation of a centralized business state. Money for legislation and protection (i.e., bailout insurance). Free Market? Are you kidding me?

4) The New Right is incredibly intrusive. They believe in Big Moral Government and Big Surveillance Government. From Pat Robertson to the Patriot Act, these folks are dangerous: they want government in your bedroom, on your computer, phone calls, and all over your electronic movements/transactions. You can't go phishing for Democratic governors, war protestors, and policy detractors unless you create a larger net. If your policies increase poverty and unrest (by an upward redistribution of wealth), you better grow a Big Law Enforcement State.

5) Welcome to the Dark Ages: Christianity and Big Business unite against Science. Let's face it, if you don't want Government Regulators dredging the Hudson for your PCBs or sniffing around your smoke stack, you better wage war against Science. Why do you think they want a citizenry who believes in the Bible, not the periodic chart. [Study your Leo Strauss. You must drug the masses with fear, religion, and patriotism. You must talk about "evil-doers" not oil geopolitics]

Hmmm, really?..........Hey, any of you guys watch that Pitt. vs. UConn game over the weekend??

 

[KMAN]

I realized the other day that I have been debating with conservatives on the USMB and else where, and yet, I only think I know what conservatives want, but I have never had it actually laid out for me. I'll list what I think Conservatism stands for and why, and you conservatives correct me and add anything I might've left out. Please be prepared to answer questions and defend your points.

And I would welcome if a conservative did this for liberals. It could be a great way to have an open dialogue and gain a greater understanding of the other side's perspective and motives.

Please refrain from angry posts, name-calling, and other unhelpful communication techniques (or lack thereof).
*****************************************************************

Fiscal Conservatism:

1. Lower taxes, because you should keep what you earn and there are many lazy people who simply want or live off of government hand-outs; and, to keep the economy strong.

2. Less government intrusion in our personal lives, because you know how to live your life and the government should have nothing to do with it.

3. Less governmental regulations on business practices, because that's the foundation of free market capitalism.

4. Abolishment of Welfare and Medicaid, see #1.

5. Privatized Social Security or its abolishment, because you know better how to spend and save your money.

6. Broadened opportunity to attain wealth, see #3.

7. The Federal government should have nothing to do with education, it requires more taxes, see #1.

Social Conservatism

1. Abortion criminalized, because its murder (per the Bible).

2. A government based on Christian Values, because the founding fathers were Christians and that's the morality on which they founded the nation.

3. Homosexuality banned, because the Bible says so.

4. Affirmative action discontinued, because black people are playing the race card and not really suffering as badly as they project. And, ultimately, affirmative action hurts all of the races.

5. Stricter legal sentences for criminals and drug users, to deter and lower the crime rate.

Other:

1. Strong Defense, because otherwise we would be invaded or destroyed, or our allies would.

2. To Maintain the US's role as the world economic and military superpower, see Fiscal Conservatism #6 and Other #1.

3. Right to bear arms, to defend yourself against criminals and to have the opportunity to revolt against the government if you thought it was necessary.

4. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American government are mostly good, except for over-spending, activist judges, over taxation of the wealthy and of business, and lenient jail terms.

5. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American society are mostly wrong, because of teaching wrong things about Christianity in public schools, liberal media bias, liberal immorality, and widespread crime and drug use.

I know there's more but I can't think of'em. Alright, have at!

It's really pretty simple for me... Follow the US Constitution... Which says anything not in the US Constitution goes back to the states... That's it... Maybe I am not a Conservative but that's my definition.

 

[Meister]

I realized the other day that I have been debating with conservatives on the USMB and else where, and yet, I only think I know what conservatives want, but I have never had it actually laid out for me. I'll list what I think Conservatism stands for and why, and you conservatives correct me and add anything I might've left out. Please be prepared to answer questions and defend your points.

And I would welcome if a conservative did this for liberals. It could be a great way to have an open dialogue and gain a greater understanding of the other side's perspective and motives.

Please refrain from angry posts, name-calling, and other unhelpful communication techniques (or lack thereof).
*****************************************************************

Fiscal Conservatism:

1. Lower taxes, because you should keep what you earn and there are many lazy people who simply want or live off of government hand-outs; and, to keep the economy strong.

2. Less government intrusion in our personal lives, because you know how to live your life and the government should have nothing to do with it.

3. Less governmental regulations on business practices, because that's the foundation of free market capitalism.

4. Abolishment of Welfare and Medicaid, see #1.

5. Privatized Social Security or its abolishment, because you know better how to spend and save your money.

6. Broadened opportunity to attain wealth, see #3.

7. The Federal government should have nothing to do with education, it requires more taxes, see #1.

Social Conservatism

1. Abortion criminalized, because its murder (per the Bible).

2. A government based on Christian Values, because the founding fathers were Christians and that's the morality on which they founded the nation.

3. Homosexuality banned, because the Bible says so.

4. Affirmative action discontinued, because black people are playing the race card and not really suffering as badly as they project. And, ultimately, affirmative action hurts all of the races.

5. Stricter legal sentences for criminals and drug users, to deter and lower the crime rate.

Other:

1. Strong Defense, because otherwise we would be invaded or destroyed, or our allies would.

2. To Maintain the US's role as the world economic and military superpower, see Fiscal Conservatism #6 and Other #1.

3. Right to bear arms, to defend yourself against criminals and to have the opportunity to revolt against the government if you thought it was necessary.

4. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American government are mostly good, except for over-spending, activist judges, over taxation of the wealthy and of business, and lenient jail terms.

5. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American society are mostly wrong, because of teaching wrong things about Christianity in public schools, liberal media bias, liberal immorality, and widespread crime and drug use.

I know there's more but I can't think of'em. Alright, have at!

It's really pretty simple for me... Follow the US Constitution... Which says anything not in the US Constitution goes back to the states... That's it... Maybe I am not a Conservative but that's my definition.

Trust me on this one KMAN...your a good conservative.

 

[johnrocks]

It's pretty simple for me. Less government intervention, both foreign and domestic. This means a lot more freedom as well as a lot more personal responsibility and with that comes some messiness, some will fall through and get hurt,some will lose their homes,some will not get full healthcare but we will be more free, less taxed and we can then get down to actually helping our fellow man that truly deserves to be helped and to hell with those who want to play the system on both sides.

I'm sorry, John, but being a liberal it isn't clear to me what you mean exactly by government intervention. Could you elaborate that for me?

And I from my perspective, it doesn't seem like we can trust private business or that it is likely that invidivuals, without federal regulations, to support medicaid or welfare. And, having come to politics in the Bush Jr. era, I don't see how we lower taxes and maintain the level of federal programs that help with poverty. How do you think we can lower taxes and yet help the elderly who survive solely on social security to get the medical treatment and medicines they need, and keep poverty at a low level and thereby crime at a low level and society as a whole at a higher level (because of better rates of high school and college graduations and lower rates of alcoholism, etc.)?

What do you think about all US citizens having access to affordable health care? What about children having health care?

And how do you mean that we will be more free? Do you mean as in business regulations, social liberties (such as abortion rights or gay rights) or both or am I totally off-track?

Government intervention domestic. Having laws to protect property rights such as not allowing someone or company to pollute streams, not banning me from buying sudafed at 3 a.m. at the local Wal Greens, allowing people to take risks and succeed but also have the understanding that you can lose everything if you take on too much risk or act foolishly.

No Govt. intervention foreign. Don't interfere or have entangling alliances especially where we have no interests, we spend billions aiding both sides in the ME and the entire Muslim World resents us by and large, Israel is of no interest to us from a economic or strategic standpoint yet we spend billions on them even though religious people will never compromise, we place our nosey asses smack dab in the middle, we spend billions and borrow billions from Europe and Japan defending Europe and Japan and we get hardly nothing in return.

 

[oreo]

1. Fiscal responsibility: Meaning no more taxpayer dollars going to the pig stink in Iowa program. That belongs to Iowa, it's Iowa's problem & the citizens of Iowa can handle their own problems with pig stink. If they don't want the pig stink then it should be up to the taxpayers of Iowa to pay for the removal of the pig stink.

2. More state control. States are much more effective at handleing their own problems, such as immigration, medical insurance, roads & bridges, & education concerns than someone in Washington, D.C. is. Plus most states have to balance their budgets--a real plus in my book.

3. Federal government to stay out of the private sector: The ground ZERO collapse of our economy is because of Fannie/Freddie- Basically federal government-intervention into our private sector banking process. Our government "pressured" banks into lending to people with bad credit, no down payment & no income to pay for. FOR PROOF:

Go to: New York Times
Date: Sept. 30, 1999
Title: Fannie reduces credit requirements to aid mortgage lending

Make certain to also read the warning at the bottom of the article: It's unbelievable.

Also to note--that our Federal government was set up to protect this country--period. It was never intended to be a catch all for every known problem of man. Every time our government has worked it's fingers into the private sector, they have ALWAYS managed to screw it up.

Government is not the solution, it's the problem: "Ronald Reagan"

 

[BrokenAngel]

Fiscal Conservatism:

1. Lower taxes, because you should keep what you earn and there are many lazy people who simply want or live off of government hand-outs; and, to keep the economy strong.

2. Less government intrusion in our personal lives, because you know how to live your life and the government should have nothing to do with it.

3. Less governmental regulations on business practices, because that's the foundation of free market capitalism.

4. Abolishment of Welfare and Medicaid, see #1.

5. Privatized Social Security or its abolishment, because you know better how to spend and save your money.

6. Broadened opportunity to attain wealth, see #3.

7. The Federal government should have nothing to do with education, education should be an issue of each individual state, see #1.

Social Conservatism

1. Abortion criminalized, because its murder (per the Bible or the individual's personal sense of morality).

2. A government that doesn't inhibit Christian values, because the founding fathers were Christians and because it is the morality on which they founded the nation it shouldn't be discriminated against.

3. Homosexuality banned, because the Bible says so. (Most conservatives honestly just don't want it thrown in their face again and again. It is like any public display of affection.. more often than not you are going to offend someone for one reason or another.)

4. Affirmative action discontinued, because black people are playing the race card and not really suffering as badly as they project. And, ultimately, affirmative action hurts all of the races.

5. Stricter legal sentences for criminals and drug users, to deter and lower the crime rate.

Other:

1. Strong Defense, because otherwise we would be invaded or destroyed, or our allies would.

2. To Maintain the US's role as the world economic and military superpower, see Fiscal Conservatism #6 and Other #1.

3. Right to bear arms, to defend yourself against criminals and to have the opportunity to revolt against the government if you thought it was necessary. (Revolt isn't the important factor here, but rather the want to have a government that doesn't feel it has the free right to roll over its people.)

4. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American government are mostly good, except for over-spending, activist judges, unfair discrimination that leads to over taxation of the wealthy and of business, and lenient jail terms.

5. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American society are mostly wrong, because of teaching hateful things about Christianity in public schools, liberal media bias, liberal immorality, and widespread crime and drug use.

Changes I made are in bold and in italics if I simply added a point.

 

[Meister]

Fiscal Conservatism:

1. Lower taxes, because you should keep what you earn and there are many lazy people who simply want or live off of government hand-outs; and, to keep the economy strong.

2. Less government intrusion in our personal lives, because you know how to live your life and the government should have nothing to do with it.

3. Less governmental regulations on business practices, because that's the foundation of free market capitalism.

4. Abolishment of Welfare and Medicaid, see #1.

5. Privatized Social Security or its abolishment, because you know better how to spend and save your money.

6. Broadened opportunity to attain wealth, see #3.

7. The Federal government should have nothing to do with education, education should be an issue of each individual state, see #1.

Social Conservatism

1. Abortion criminalized, because its murder (per the Bible or the individual's personal sense of morality).

2. A government that doesn't inhibit Christian values, because the founding fathers were Christians and because it is the morality on which they founded the nation it shouldn't be discriminated against.

3. Homosexuality banned, because the Bible says so. (Most conservatives honestly just don't want it thrown in their face again and again. It is like any public display of affection.. more often than not you are going to offend someone for one reason or another.)

4. Affirmative action discontinued, because black people are playing the race card and not really suffering as badly as they project. And, ultimately, affirmative action hurts all of the races.

5. Stricter legal sentences for criminals and drug users, to deter and lower the crime rate.

Other:

1. Strong Defense, because otherwise we would be invaded or destroyed, or our allies would.

2. To Maintain the US's role as the world economic and military superpower, see Fiscal Conservatism #6 and Other #1.

3. Right to bear arms, to defend yourself against criminals and to have the opportunity to revolt against the government if you thought it was necessary. (Revolt isn't the important factor here, but rather the want to have a government that doesn't feel it has the free right to roll over its people.)

4. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American government are mostly good, except for over-spending, activist judges, unfair discrimination that leads to over taxation of the wealthy and of business, and lenient jail terms.

5. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American society are mostly wrong, because of teaching hateful things about Christianity in public schools, liberal media bias, liberal immorality, and widespread crime and drug use.

Changes I made are in bold and in italics if I simply added a point.

Hey what do you think of those 1969 Mets?

 

[Amanda]

Fiscal Conservatism:

1. Lower taxes, because you should keep what you earn and there are many lazy people who simply want or live off of government hand-outs; and, to keep the economy strong.

Pretty much agree

2. Less government intrusion in our personal lives, because you know how to live your life and the government should have nothing to do with it.

Pretty much agree

3. Less governmental regulations on business practices, because that's the foundation of free market capitalism.

Pretty much agree

4. Abolishment of Welfare and Medicaid, see #1.

I don't think that can be done at this point. I think serious reform is in order tho.

5. Privatized Social Security or its abolishment, because you know better how to spend and save your money.

Same as 4

6. Broadened opportunity to attain wealth, see #3.

Don't understand this one.

7. The Federal government should have nothing to do with education, it requires more taxes, see #1.

I don't like the idea of compulsory attendance. I think there should be a way to test out.

Social Conservatism

1. Abortion criminalized, because its murder (per the Bible).

Don't agree.

2. A government based on Christian Values, because the founding fathers were Christians and that's the morality on which they founded the nation.

Ya know, I've know more than 1 conservative atheist. Just sayin'

3. Homosexuality banned, because the Bible says so.

Don't agree.

4. Affirmative action discontinued, because black people are playing the race card and not really suffering as badly as they project. And, ultimately, affirmative action hurts all of the races.

It should be done away with because it IS racism.

5. Stricter legal sentences for criminals and drug users, to deter and lower the crime rate.

Don't agree for any moral crimes. Violent criminals and serious white collar criminals, yes.
Other:

1. Strong Defense, because otherwise we would be invaded or destroyed, or our allies would.

Agree

2. To Maintain the US's role as the world economic and military superpower, see Fiscal Conservatism #6 and Other #1.

Pretty much agree

3. Right to bear arms, to defend yourself against criminals and to have the opportunity to revolt against the government if you thought it was necessary.

Agree

4. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American government are mostly good, except for over-spending, activist judges, over taxation of the wealthy and of business, and lenient jail terms.

Too broad of a generalization.

5. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American society are mostly wrong, because of teaching wrong things about Christianity in public schools, liberal media bias, liberal immorality, and widespread crime and drug use.

Too broad.

 

[Care4all]

1. Fiscal responsibility: Meaning no more taxpayer dollars going to the pig stink in Iowa program. That belongs to Iowa, it's Iowa's problem & the citizens of Iowa can handle their own problems with pig stink. If they don't want the pig stink then it should be up to the taxpayers of Iowa to pay for the removal of the pig stink.

2. More state control. States are much more effective at handleing their own problems, such as immigration, medical insurance, roads & bridges, & education concerns than someone in Washington, D.C. is. Plus most states have to balance their budgets--a real plus in my book.

3. Federal government to stay out of the private sector: The ground ZERO collapse of our economy is because of Fannie/Freddie- Basically federal government-intervention into our private sector banking process. Our government "pressured" banks into lending to people with bad credit, no down payment & no income to pay for. FOR PROOF:

Go to: New York Times
Date: Sept. 30, 1999
Title: Fannie reduces credit requirements to aid mortgage lending

Make certain to also read the warning at the bottom of the article: It's unbelievable.

Also to note--that our Federal government was set up to protect this country--period. It was never intended to be a catch all for every known problem of man. Every time our government has worked it's fingers into the private sector, they have ALWAYS managed to screw it up.

Government is not the solution, it's the problem: "Ronald Reagan"

Here's the link to the article you keep spamming without giving the link for it....

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - New York Times

It is a very informative article, but i do not believe it is some smoking gun that you are implying it is....I guess you got the email from who you take your marching orders from and this is why you keep spamming it...did you even read the full article oreo....? Or did you once again take things out of context? OF course you didn't read the whole article...you couldn't even supply the link for it, and certainly did not understand it if you did read the full article...again, imo.

 

[Zoomie1980]

I realized the other day that I have been debating with conservatives on the USMB and else where, and yet, I only think I know what conservatives want, but I have never had it actually laid out for me. I'll list what I think Conservatism stands for and why, and you conservatives correct me and add anything I might've left out. Please be prepared to answer questions and defend your points.

And I would welcome if a conservative did this for liberals. It could be a great way to have an open dialogue and gain a greater understanding of the other side's perspective and motives.

Please refrain from angry posts, name-calling, and other unhelpful communication techniques (or lack thereof).
*****************************************************************

Fiscal Conservatism:

1. Lower taxes, because you should keep what you earn and there are many lazy people who simply want or live off of government hand-outs; and, to keep the economy strong.

2. Less government intrusion in our personal lives, because you know how to live your life and the government should have nothing to do with it.

3. Less governmental regulations on business practices, because that's the foundation of free market capitalism.

4. Abolishment of Welfare and Medicaid, see #1.

5. Privatized Social Security or its abolishment, because you know better how to spend and save your money.

6. Broadened opportunity to attain wealth, see #3.

7. The Federal government should have nothing to do with education, it requires more taxes, see #1.

Social Conservatism

1. Abortion criminalized, because its murder (per the Bible).

2. A government based on Christian Values, because the founding fathers were Christians and that's the morality on which they founded the nation.

3. Homosexuality banned, because the Bible says so.

4. Affirmative action discontinued, because black people are playing the race card and not really suffering as badly as they project. And, ultimately, affirmative action hurts all of the races.

5. Stricter legal sentences for criminals and drug users, to deter and lower the crime rate.

Other:

1. Strong Defense, because otherwise we would be invaded or destroyed, or our allies would.

2. To Maintain the US's role as the world economic and military superpower, see Fiscal Conservatism #6 and Other #1.

3. Right to bear arms, to defend yourself against criminals and to have the opportunity to revolt against the government if you thought it was necessary.

4. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American government are mostly good, except for over-spending, activist judges, over taxation of the wealthy and of business, and lenient jail terms.

5. Conservatives would mostly agree that: The way things are in American society are mostly wrong, because of teaching wrong things about Christianity in public schools, liberal media bias, liberal immorality, and widespread crime and drug use.

I know there's more but I can't think of'em. Alright, have at!

I think you are confusing some libertarian views vs conservative. Conservative generally means status-quo or "traditional" values that stem mostly from the country's Judeo-Christian ethic and moral basis of our laws. Any policy that reflects self-reliance or adherence to most christian or "biblical" values is "conservative".

Anything to do with rejection of the "nanny-state", and intrusion of government into private life is "libertarian" and necessarily conservative. For instance, libertarians do not want the government to tell a person what to do concerning abortion. A libertarian would never condone the government force a doctor or nurse to perform abortions and at the same time would never condone the government forbidding them, either. One is probably considered liberal the other conservative but BOTH are libertarian.

 

[txlonghorn]

Personally, I don't think you can take any one person's conservative values and come to a conclusion as to what conservatism is. Just as I would not presume to understand how any one liberal position difines liberalism. You can take all the pot shots you want at bible thumping conservatism and get as loud and anti-religious as you want (thanks Bill Maher), but when you focus on the 900 lb gorilla in the room, you tend to miss the important yet smaller things. Sure, there is something to be said for having morals. Some of us find our values in our religious beliefs...others find their values within themselves. Who is right? Does it matter? There is a logical and acceptable code of human conduct that we should all strive for. Sadly, the 10 easy to follow and easy to understand guidelines for our existence are found in the bible, (and a couple of them happen to mention God). Why is that sad? Simple...Those who refuse to believe in God, or a god, or anything higher than themselves, can't follow these laws in their complete form.

As a conservative, I can only tell you what I want for myself. Freedom. Freedom to choose how the money I earn is spent. Freedom to worship the God of my choosing, when and where I want. Freedom to live without fear of persecution for those beliefs. Freedom to select my own doctor. Freedom of speech. Freedom from terror. Freedom to bare arms. Freedom to be a servant to those in need, but of my own choosing, so that I can decide who is the most deserving of my help.

Freedom from radical actionists who abuse their power to push their agenda on an entire nation. No matter what party they may be from...a radical is a radical. And I don't harbor faith in any of them.

Freedom from government controlled services, employment, earnings and industry. The American Dream was never seen through the eyes of limited ability. But with government control, there are limits. There is no freedom in big government. There is no American Dream when you are harnessed from acheivement.

This country will only be as great as the people who live in it. We can strive to be achievers or we can settle for being charity cases. Personally, I don't think anyone can take care of me, better that I can. And I don't think anyone can take care of someone in need better than that person who recognizes that a lending hand in a time of need can be just as detrimental as it can be helpful. Especially, if the assistance given is for the wrong reason or in the wrong way. Some don't need a helping hand...they need a swift kick in the pants to get them on their own two feet and making the decision to do for themselves instead of expecting everything should be handed to them.

 

[jeffrockit]

Conservatives want to be happy. They think happiness is all about themselves.[/QUOTE

Liberals want to be happy. They want everyone to be their kind of happy.

 

[oreo]

Conservatives want to be happy. They think happiness is all about themselves.

WRONG--Conservatives want everyone to be successful & happy. We view liberals as wanting to take the money of the successful & redistribute it to others who did not work has hard as the successful in order to attain success.

"While a liberal is concerned about distributing the golden eggs that the Golden Goose produces, a conservative is more concerned about the health of the Golden Goose."

 

[Amanda]

PFreedom to be a servant to those in need, but of my own choosing, so that I can decide who is the most deserving of my help.

You made a lot of good points but I wanted to focus on this one because I think a lot of liberals misunderstand how conservative charity works.

If I come across a mother and her hungry children I will take them to the store and buy them food (actually I would probably take them to my church where we have a food bank, but if I didn't have that source I would pay for it myself).

If I come to a highway exit ramp and you're standing there with your hand out you can suck exhaust fumes. If you can stand there all day you can wear a silly costume and twirl a sign for a muffler shop and EARN an honest dollar.

I have no charity for the lazy or greedy. I will give my last dollar to someone in honest need. I don't want the government to take my money away and give it to people that could work but refuse to work. Where I'm from you know your neighbors and if they are in need everyone will pitch in and help if you deserve it. If you piss your money away drinking and gambling then sorry you're going to lose the house before you get help. Personal responsibility will take you most places in life, good friends and family will give you a boost if you really need it.

You let charity work any other way and people will abuse whatever system you can make.

I bet you can't find a conservative on here that doesn't agree.

 

[oreo]

PFreedom to be a servant to those in need, but of my own choosing, so that I can decide who is the most deserving of my help.

You made a lot of good points but I wanted to focus on this one because I think a lot of liberals misunderstand how conservative charity works.

If I come across a mother and her hungry children I will take them to the store and buy them food (actually I would probably take them to my church where we have a food bank, but if I didn't have that source I would pay for it myself).

If I come to a highway exit ramp and you're standing there with your hand out you can suck exhaust fumes. If you can stand there all day you can wear a silly costume and twirl a sign for a muffler shop and EARN an honest dollar.

I have no charity for the lazy or greedy. I will give my last dollar to someone in honest need. I don't want the government to take my money away and give it to people that could work but refuse to work. Where I'm from you know your neighbors and if they are in need everyone will pitch in and help if you deserve it. If you piss your money away drinking and gambling then sorry you're going to lose the house before you get help. Personal responsibility will take you most places in life, good friends and family will give you a boost if you really need it.

You let charity work any other way and people will abuse whatever system you can make.

I bet you can't find a conservative on here that doesn't agree.

Agreed 100%. Not only that, conservatives are much more likely to write out that donation check than liberals. That is a fact!

 

[oreo]

1. Fiscal responsibility: Meaning no more taxpayer dollars going to the pig stink in Iowa program. That belongs to Iowa, it's Iowa's problem & the citizens of Iowa can handle their own problems with pig stink. If they don't want the pig stink then it should be up to the taxpayers of Iowa to pay for the removal of the pig stink.

2. More state control. States are much more effective at handleing their own problems, such as immigration, medical insurance, roads & bridges, & education concerns than someone in Washington, D.C. is. Plus most states have to balance their budgets--a real plus in my book.

3. Federal government to stay out of the private sector: The ground ZERO collapse of our economy is because of Fannie/Freddie- Basically federal government-intervention into our private sector banking process. Our government "pressured" banks into lending to people with bad credit, no down payment & no income to pay for. FOR PROOF:

Go to: New York Times
Date: Sept. 30, 1999
Title: Fannie reduces credit requirements to aid mortgage lending

Make certain to also read the warning at the bottom of the article: It's unbelievable.

Also to note--that our Federal government was set up to protect this country--period. It was never intended to be a catch all for every known problem of man. Every time our government has worked it's fingers into the private sector, they have ALWAYS managed to screw it up.

Government is not the solution, it's the problem: "Ronald Reagan"

Here's the link to the article you keep spamming without giving the link for it....

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - New York Times

It is a very informative article, but i do not believe it is some smoking gun that you are implying it is....I guess you got the email from who you take your marching orders from and this is why you keep spamming it...did you even read the full article oreo....? Or did you once again take things out of context? OF course you didn't read the whole article...you couldn't even supply the link for it, and certainly did not understand it if you did read the full article...again, imo.

Do you have any reading comprehension skills? Anyone who reads this article--knows that this democrat policy of "everyone deserves homeownership" is Ground Zero for all of the economic crisis we are having today. Only someone extremely intent on protecting the political party they typically vote for would state that this is "no smoking gun". Hell it's bigger than a gun, the above article is a 50 ton bomb of record & fact.

Is there something you don't understand about the warning in this article? "In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.'' September 30, 1999.

 

[Care4all]

PFreedom to be a servant to those in need, but of my own choosing, so that I can decide who is the most deserving of my help.

You made a lot of good points but I wanted to focus on this one because I think a lot of liberals misunderstand how conservative charity works.

If I come across a mother and her hungry children I will take them to the store and buy them food (actually I would probably take them to my church where we have a food bank, but if I didn't have that source I would pay for it myself).

If I come to a highway exit ramp and you're standing there with your hand out you can suck exhaust fumes. If you can stand there all day you can wear a silly costume and twirl a sign for a muffler shop and EARN an honest dollar.

I have no charity for the lazy or greedy. I will give my last dollar to someone in honest need. I don't want the government to take my money away and give it to people that could work but refuse to work. Where I'm from you know your neighbors and if they are in need everyone will pitch in and help if you deserve it. If you piss your money away drinking and gambling then sorry you're going to lose the house before you get help. Personal responsibility will take you most places in life, good friends and family will give you a boost if you really need it.

You let charity work any other way and people will abuse whatever system you can make.

I bet you can't find a conservative on here that doesn't agree.

if you "take care of your own", that is, if they are not lazy or if they don't get drunk...then how come the most conservative in nature states receive the most government welfare and earmarks?

It all sounds wonderful Amanda, and this might be the case with you, which i do not doubt, but it sure doesn't seem like conservatives really take care of the needy with their own money as you imply...we wouldn't need the government welfare to help all of these conservative leaning states if this were truly the case.....logic and the numbers show such.

But is it an 'ideal' for it to be that way for republicans or conservatives....sure....

 

[editec]

I usually find that most self proclaiming conservatives really want the same outcomes I want for our nation.

Generally they think the way to get there is a slightly different path.

Who here wants a bankrupted goverment?

Nobody?

How about a population of people not making enough to take care of themselves?

Nobody?

How about a nation so broke it can no longer afford a top notch military?

Nobody?

How about a nation where we have no individual liberties?

Nobody?

Anybody want to live in an environmental mess which poisons our children?

No?

See my point?

Our debates are seldom: What do we want?

Our debates are usually: How do we achieve our aims?