"Far Right" can't win for GOP? ...BS!

[edthecynic]

There is no "radical right" or "far right:" to speak of, at least not among true Conservatives.

What you MEAN is there is nothing more far right than a CON$ervative.
You've been Bossed!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Mussolini said that fascism was right wing. And of course, you're dismissing anyone who was educated in a college.

The anti-intellectual vein among conservatives continues to flow like a depressingly powerful river.

Context would be your friend, if your grasped it. Even in the quote you mis-quote, Mussolini says that Fascism is on the right BECAUSE it favors military expansion. It has no meaning in terms of American society - you are simply engaging in the big lie.

 

[edthecynic]

If Republicans keep losing because they keep losing moderates by big numbers, why do conservatives think that an even more conservative candidate that is less appealing to moderates is a winning formula?

Because every time the GOP loses their MessiahRushie tells them it is because the GOP is not CON$ervative enough while the Dems were more CON$ervative and the far right mindless drones like Bossy swallow it whole and parrot it as programmed.

December 13, 2006
RUSH: Republicans lost last night but conservatism did not, and that is, to me, one of the fundamental elements of last night's results. Conservatism did not lose; Republicans lost last night. In fact, Republicanism, being a political party first rather than an ideological movement, is what lost.

There was conservatism yesterday in the election, and it was to be found on the Democratic side of the aisle. There were conservative Democrats running for office in the House of Representatives and a couple conservative Senate races won by Democrats yesterday -- Jim Webb being one. Heath Shuler, of course, is one of many... But conservatism won when it was tried yesterday. Conservatism won fairly big when it was tried...

Thomas Sowell put this very well. He said the latest example of "election fraud" is actually what the Democrats did. They nominated a bunch of moderate and conservative Democrats for the express purpose of electing a far-left Democrat leadership. If you're looking for a good side, Democrats could not win this election being liberals. They could not have won the House being liberals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are simply not going to be Bossed.

Neither will the American people.

 

[HenryBHough]

We are simply not going to be Bossed.

Neither will the American people.

A six year nap?

Even in the warmest of Dr. Dentons, Jammie-Jake, not bloody likely.

 

[Boss]

I implied you were following Rush's Rules. Accuse others of doing what you are doing. Reinvent words. Don't allow the other side to be "intepreters."

All of your points were refuted above so you don't get "just once more."

Your writing reveals that you are libertarian in much of your ideology.

Jake, frankly I don't know what this "just once more" thing means. I have not asked for anything more than for you to produce some evidence of my "far-right-ness" or extreme radical fundamentalist wacko views. You've failed to do that. You can just flat out lie and claim all my points have been refuted above, but that's still a lie.

You didn't "imply" anything when you claimed I had quoted Rush, other than implying that I quoted Rush. Now you are claiming that was you implying something else. And I didn't "reveal" that I am libertarian in much of my ideology, I outright stated that most of my ideology is libertarian-leaning. I did this in response to your continued lie that I am a radical extremist "far-right reactionary" which you still haven't backed up.

So we see a pattern of behavior here... you continue to lie, make statements you can't back up, lie about the lies and claim you were implying things that you never implied and implying things you can't support with evidence. The more this is pointed out to you, the more you lie and continue to lie about your lies. I can tell you're going to make an excellent Hillary voter... you are so much alike!

 

[Boss]

conservatism is a philosophy and not an ideology

I will give you a taste of your own medicine.
When you say, "conservatism is a philosophy and not an ideology" you MEAN "conservatism is an ideology and not a philosophy."

Awww... Isn't it cute when a moronic liberal tries to be clever?

Okay... So IF Conservatism is an ideology and not a philosophy, please explain how a social conservative and a libertarian can both be devoutly conservative yet also totally disagree on pot legalization, abortion and gay marriage? Did one of them miss the ideological memo?

 

[Boss]

If Republicans keep losing because they keep losing moderates by big numbers, why do conservatives think that an even more conservative candidate that is less appealing to moderates is a winning formula?

Because "moderate" doesn't mean "non-conservative" and it never has or will. The vast majority of "moderates" are people who have a conservative philosophy. They aren't going to vote for a Republican who doesn't have a conservative philosophy and doesn't have a clue as to what that is.

You are operating under a false assumption.. or several. Republican doesn't mean conservative, and independent or moderate doesn't mean non-conservative. Conservatism is a philosophy which crosses over numerous ideological lines. I mentioned earlier there can even be Liberal Conservatives. Some of my favorite Liberal Conservatives were Patrick Moynihan, Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman. When Bill Clinton won as a populist Democrat, he ran as a Conservative.

 

[edthecynic]

IF Conservatism is an ideology and not a philosophy, please explain how a social conservative and a libertarian can both be devoutly conservative yet also totally disagree on pot legalization, abortion and gay marriage? Did one of them miss the ideological memo?

Probably the same way you can call Liberalism an ideology when you have Marxist Liberals, Socialist Liberals and Capitalistic Liberals all disagreeing on economics yet all devoutly Liberal.

You just don't like when you get Bossed.

 

[edthecynic]

I mentioned earlier there can even be Liberal Conservatives. Some of my favorite Liberal Conservatives were Patrick Moynihan, Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman.

God has spoken, how dare anyone disagree!

But wouldn't they be CON$ervative Liberals proving Liberalism is not the ideology YOU label it as!!!!

 

[HenryBHough]

Liberalism is NOT an ideology.

Obviously it IS a religion.

 

[edthecynic]

Liberalism is NOT an ideology.

Obviously it IS a religion.

And CON$ervatism is a hate religion.

You've been Bossed!

 

[HenryBHough]

And CON$ervatism is a hate religion.

You've been Bossed!

You seem upset that, in America, multiple religions are allowed. Do you have one in mind to be mandatory? Have you objects of veneration to sell? Maybe nice hand-woven prayer rugs?

 

[Boss]

IF Conservatism is an ideology and not a philosophy, please explain how a social conservative and a libertarian can both be devoutly conservative yet also totally disagree on pot legalization, abortion and gay marriage? Did one of them miss the ideological memo?

Probably the same way you can call Liberalism an ideology when you have Marxist Liberals, Socialist Liberals and Capitalistic Liberals all disagreeing on economics yet all devoutly Liberal.

You just don't like when you get Bossed.

I've not been bossed, especially by the likes of you.

Liberalism is an ideology. Regardless of whether there are different kinds of liberals, all liberals adhere to an ideology with an agenda of socially liberal policies. Conservatives do not adhere to an ideological conservative agenda, that makes Conservatism different. It is a philosophy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'"Far Right" can't win for GOP?'

Correct.

Left unchecked, the far right and other manifestations of conservative extremism will lose the GOP yet another General Election.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Boss claims, without evidence here, that "I am a Conservative, but I identify myself as a moderate because my personal views are moderate. That is why I can confidently challenge any Bozo here who wants to claim I am "far right:" or "radical extremist wacko right" or "fascist right" because they can't back that argument up with anything I've ever posted here. "

You can claim you are a zebra with as much effectiveness as the above: in other words, none. In fact, several times above Boss has clearly been pegged with his own remarks that he is indeed far right. One example is that he confuses socialism and fascism, refusing to accept the traditional definitions that fascism is a right wing progressive philosophy that merges state, party, and government under the leadership of the Leader.

fas·cism ˈfaSHˌizəm/ noun

1. an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
   synonyms: authoritarianism, totalitarianism, dictatorship, despotism, autocracy; More (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Sorry, JakefromStateFarm, you fail again. The only mention I've made of Fascism here was when I said that none of the candidates are Fascists, unless you consider Hillary and Obama Fascists. There is no question they are Socialists.

So if that is your example that shows me to be "far right" and "extremist" then you've failed on two fronts. First by it not being my position and second by it not being an extremist position.

I am a Conservative who holds a Conservative philosophy. I often identify as a "moderate independent" but I am not ashamed of being a Conservative. Among my moderate viewpoints, I favor Federal decriminalization of marijuana and regulation by the states. I oppose the Federal government dictating what marriage means, gay or straight. I think it should be left to the individual to define and if government must have some label to identify those in a domestic partnership, it should be generic civil union contracts between two adults. I also believe abortion should be legal but regulated by the states and restricted in any way the people of the state so choose. So there are the Big Three social issues, all of which I have a somewhat moderate independent viewpoint on, and my view is rooted in my conservative philosophy.

You may disagree with my views, but anyone can clearly see they are not extreme or "far" anything.

Only the Conservative stereotype supports all conservative issue. A Pew poll found that 61 percent of Republicans under 30 support gay marriage. According to Data Science polling, 64 percent of self-identifying Evangelical Millennials support same-sex marriage.

Which indicates the best America is yet to come, an America finally free from the bane of social conservatism and rightwing extremism.

 

[thanatos144]

Progressives think freedom and liberty is extreme. ....

 

[Boss]

'"Far Right" can't win for GOP?'

Correct.

Left unchecked, the far right and other manifestations of conservative extremism will lose the GOP yet another General Election.

You've still not indicated what is "extreme" about Conservatism. Page after page, this thread has lumbered on, no one able to articulate what is radical, extreme, or "far" about Conservative philosophy.

Is there some sort of disconnect in your brains? Until you articulate how Conservatism is extreme/radical/far, what are we going on? Your misguided and ill-informed opinions?

So is this how debates work now? We just bow up and insist whatever we think is right and we don't have to make a case for it, it's just to be accepted because we say that's how things are?

Clayton, when you come into a thread and disregard everything that has been posted, ignore all the points that have been made, that you haven't addressed... and insist that the OP is wrong because you think it is and nothing more... what you demonstrate is your devout bigotry. A closed-minded fool who isn't going to ever listen to reason and doesn't feel he has to make a case for what he believes. We are just supposed to accept you are right and what you think is correct, and far be it from any of us to challenge that.

Sorry, but if you think that is going to fly, you're full of shit.

 

[edthecynic]

IF Conservatism is an ideology and not a philosophy, please explain how a social conservative and a libertarian can both be devoutly conservative yet also totally disagree on pot legalization, abortion and gay marriage? Did one of them miss the ideological memo?

Probably the same way you can call Liberalism an ideology when you have Marxist Liberals, Socialist Liberals and Capitalistic Liberals all disagreeing on economics yet all devoutly Liberal.

You just don't like when you get Bossed.

I've not been bossed, especially by the likes of you.

Liberalism is an ideology. Regardless of whether there are different kinds of liberals, all liberals adhere to an ideology with an agenda of socially liberal policies. Conservatives do not adhere to an ideological conservative agenda, that makes Conservatism different. It is a philosophy.

The hate religion of CON$ervoFascism is an ideology. Regardless of whether there are different kinds of CON$ervoFascists, all CON$ervoFascists adhere to an ideology with an agenda of socially CON$ervative policies. Liberals do not adhere to an ideological liberal agenda, that makes Liberalism different. It is a philosophy.

You've been Bossed.

 

[Boss]

The hate religion of CON$ervoFascism is an ideology. Regardless of whether there are different kinds of CON$ervoFascists, all CON$ervoFascists adhere to an ideology with an agenda of socially CON$ervative policies. Liberals do not adhere to an ideological liberal agenda, that makes Liberalism different. It is a philosophy.

You've been Bossed.

Eddy, you seem to be trailing off into a semi-coherent rant about social conservatives who are religious. Are you so dumb you can't understand that "social conservative" isn't the same thing as "conservative philosophy"? See...it's kind of like Libertarian and Liberal... They sound similar, and perhaps someone who is borderline retarded might think they mean the same thing, but most intelligent people know they don't.

Social conservatives can be very ideological. Religious people can also be big ideologues. This does not make Conservatism an ideology. I know that contradicts the myth you've developed for all Conservatives, but you're just plain wrong and it's based on your ignorance.

Now all of this fancy creative ways of typing CON$3RvAFasci$tzzz... just illustrates what a far left loony wackadoodle you are. It shows the level of hate, bigotry and disdain you have for people who disagree with your political ideology, and that's not healthy for any of us. It eventually leads to someone getting their stupid head blown off because they forgot how to be civilized.