What do conservatives support?

[JBond]

You don't even know what the fuck "Justice" is.

As you try to block blacks from voting by eliminating Early voting in Michigan.

Republicans are fucking despicable bags of shit, total flaming hypocrites.

You are the liar. There is early voting in Michigan. Bitching about voting districts controlled by liberals makes you sound like an loon. Now quit lying and making up bullshit. Stop being a stupid pussy just because you fear honest elections. Grow up.

 

[Correll]

Conservatives support Traditions, Values and the Rule of Law. The concepts of Law and Order along with Personal Responsibility are essential to Conservative ideology. A place for everyone, and everyone in their place.

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

 

[2aguy]

Interesting tidibt.

Edmund Burke, one of the father's of Conservatism, believed that social evolution should spring from what people actually believe and want. In Burke's critique of the French Revolution, he showed the dangers that come with overturning social orders and traditions virtually form the top-down.

In short, Conservatism opposes revolutions because revolutions are too disruptive, and they don't leave sufficient room for a nation to evolve naturally/organically.

Under Burke's standards, the Reagan Revolution was not conservative. Indeed, revolutions, because of their centralized, top-down organization, are anti-conservative by definition.

Reagan inherited a nation where a huge swath of the electorate trusted big government. This makes sense because the American Government helped defeat the Nazis and put a man on the moon. Government administered the building of the Hoover Dam, the great Interstate system and satellite system and the massive public works projects that brought water and energy to unsettled territories. Seniors - who faced overwhelming poverty prior to the 40s - liked cashing their Social Security checks.

According to Reagan, the problem with Big Government is that it taxed the wealthy at too high a rate. Reagan wanted to reverse the relationship between the wealthy and government. He wanted the wealthy to be the takers, meaning he wanted them to benefit from subsidies, bailouts, infrastructure, patent protection, legal protection and military defense of overseas supply chains, but he didn't want them to have to pay for it. He turned Washington into a modern lobby state whereby large corporations (rather than "brownshirts") used financial donations to dictate the legislative behavior of politicians. He made it possible for big business to suck at the teat of big government, while lowering the cost (taxes) they paid for those services.

But the Reagan Revolution had a problem. The citizenry had lived with big Government too long, and they needed to be re-educated. So the Reagan Revolution reinvigorated the Rightwing Think Tank and Media revolution for the purpose of changing national opinion on government. Reagan wanted American citizens to hate government so that it would become harder for government to tax and regulate business. Rather than trusting the peoples' faith in things like Social Security and infrastructure investment, the Reagan Revolution did what all revolutions do: it changed peoples' minds/opinions. Indeed, the Reagan Revolution opened the floodgates for money to pour from big business into Rightwing think tanks and media. The Reagan Revolution created a massive incentive system which rewarded anyone who would make the case against government. It took 30 years, but now it is common sense to hate government.

Edmund Burke, the father of Conservatism, is turning over in his grave because he trusts the people more than he trusts a small, centralized command of revolutionaries who want to re-educate all citizens. When the Reagan Revolution decided to re-educate people by creating a talk radio/Fox/internet network of opinion shapers, it became every bit as corrupt and dangerous as the Liberals who enacted the French Revolution.

Sell this crap to democrats...they are dumb enough to believe it.

 

[Correll]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

 

[Correll]

Actually to be considered a conservative in the Republican party the platform has been changed.....

Who is bringing Republicans into this thread? I'm talking about Conservatives, not Republicans.

While you were asleep the Republican Party became the Republikan Party - all moderates and Goldwater conservatives have been tossed under the bus and deemed RINO's.

THe moderates and the party elite have been DICKS.

They tried to steal the primary election.


Thank god they failed.


Unlike in your party.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Conservatives support Traditions, Values and the Rule of Law. The concepts of Law and Order along with Personal Responsibility are essential to Conservative ideology. A place for everyone, and everyone in their place.

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

I was not implying, I posted an example of how laws were abused and "order" was a euphemism for Authoritarianism. Anyone who listened to Trump's stump speech (not those written by his new handler) heard words of a fascist, a demagogue and a charlatan.

 

[owebo]

Conservatives support Traditions, Values and the Rule of Law. The concepts of Law and Order along with Personal Responsibility are essential to Conservative ideology. A place for everyone, and everyone in their place.

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

I was not implying, I posted an example of how laws were abused and "order" was a euphemism for Authoritarianism. Anyone who listened to Trump's stump speech (not those written by his new handler) heard words of a fascist, a demagogue and a charlatan.

Yes....all the fascist liberals say so.....

 

[Wry Catcher]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

 

[owebo]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

You have no clue what conservatism is...you're too far left to ever understand.....

 

[Wry Catcher]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

You have no clue what conservatism is...you're too far left to ever understand.....

Edify me. You think I'm far left? Why?

You use "far left" as a pejorative and I'd guess you couldn't describe either (far left or the wod pejorative).

 

[owebo]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

You have no clue what conservatism is...you're too far left to ever understand.....

Edify me. You think I'm far left? Why?

You use "far left" as a pejorative and I'd guess you couldn't describe either (far left or the wod pejorative).

Your words give you away....

Actually, now that you mention it, I would call you a LWNJ....

 

[Wry Catcher]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

You have no clue what conservatism is...you're too far left to ever understand.....

Edify me. You think I'm far left? Why?

You use "far left" as a pejorative and I'd guess you couldn't describe either (far left or the wod pejorative).

Your words give you away....

Actually, now that you mention it, I would call you a LWNJ....

That's fine with me, pejoratives are the grist for an extremist like you - anyone who claims my opinions far left are both liars and fools.

 

[Correll]

Conservatives support Traditions, Values and the Rule of Law. The concepts of Law and Order along with Personal Responsibility are essential to Conservative ideology. A place for everyone, and everyone in their place.

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

I was not implying, I posted an example of how laws were abused and "order" was a euphemism for Authoritarianism. Anyone who listened to Trump's stump speech (not those written by his new handler) heard words of a fascist, a demagogue and a charlatan.

Only if you believe that ONE historical example demonstrates that that is the ONLY POSSIBLE scenario.


Which is utterly ridiculous.

Using that "logic" the fact the ONE planet, Earth, has life on it, that would mean that ALL planets have life on them.

Or that ONE apple was poisoned by an evil witch, that means ALL apples have been poisoned by evil witches.

You are utterly ridiculous.

 

[Correll]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

That fact that deporting illegal aliens, and bring back manufacturing jobs and NOT fucking with Russia, is seen as "extremist" or "disgraceful" shows that there is a problem with this nation as a whole.


And TRump is the answer.


And regardless, you asked what Conservatives support, and I posted the answer.


Cease your nonsensical claims now.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Conservatives support Traditions, Values and the Rule of Law. The concepts of Law and Order along with Personal Responsibility are essential to Conservative ideology. A place for everyone, and everyone in their place.

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

I was not implying, I posted an example of how laws were abused and "order" was a euphemism for Authoritarianism. Anyone who listened to Trump's stump speech (not those written by his new handler) heard words of a fascist, a demagogue and a charlatan.

Only if you believe that ONE historical example demonstrates that that is the ONLY POSSIBLE scenario.


Which is utterly ridiculous.

Using that "logic" the fact the ONE planet, Earth, has life on it, that would mean that ALL planets have life on them.

Or that ONE apple was poisoned by an evil witch, that means ALL apples have been poisoned by evil witches.

You are utterly ridiculous.

Get your head out of the sand and listen to Trump's stump speech - in short you will hear hate, fear and ridiculous promises, if you listen. One example can be, and in this case is, instructive, but only for those who apply sagacious reasoning to the issue.

 

[Wry Catcher]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

That fact that deporting illegal aliens, and bring back manufacturing jobs and NOT fucking with Russia, is seen as "extremist" or "disgraceful" shows that there is a problem with this nation as a whole.


And TRump is the answer.


And regardless, you asked what Conservatives support, and I posted the answer.


Cease your nonsensical claims now.

I don't take kindly to orders from anonymous sources on the Internet, especially those who read my comments with a bias, and then respond with a wiki definition which is not relevant to the contemporary iteration of 21st. century conservatism.

IMO, 21st. century conservatism is akin to fascism. You may of course disagree, but calling this claim nonsensical is not a rebuttal, it's a logical fallacy.

 

[MarcATL]

I've argued many times that conservatives are defined on what they oppose (gay marriage, taxes, change, the ERA, sex ed in school, abortion, free contraceptives, labor unions, the UN, democracy,
Affirmative Action/consent decrees, gun control, FEMA, the PPACA, Climate Change, a Government too large , (how large is too large for a nation of 300 + million?), public school teachers and other government employees - until they need them.

I've also posted the 14 points of Fascism, which, when applied to the statements / rhetoric of Trump are enlightening, and should IMO give pause to those opposed to an authoritarian federal government when considering a vote for the Republikan nominees. We don't need a Big Brother

Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism

Keep these sage comments i mind when in the voting booth:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
MARTIN NIEMÖLLER

You're a fool if you think the federal government is not too large and overbearing. or you're blind, Deaf and dumb...

You're only a fool if you don't believe that Big Business has grown too large, corrupt and dominating in our system of government.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[Correll]

Conservatives support Traditions, Values and the Rule of Law. The concepts of Law and Order along with Personal Responsibility are essential to Conservative ideology. A place for everyone, and everyone in their place.

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

I was not implying, I posted an example of how laws were abused and "order" was a euphemism for Authoritarianism. Anyone who listened to Trump's stump speech (not those written by his new handler) heard words of a fascist, a demagogue and a charlatan.

Only if you believe that ONE historical example demonstrates that that is the ONLY POSSIBLE scenario.


Which is utterly ridiculous.

Using that "logic" the fact the ONE planet, Earth, has life on it, that would mean that ALL planets have life on them.

Or that ONE apple was poisoned by an evil witch, that means ALL apples have been poisoned by evil witches.

You are utterly ridiculous.

Get your head out of the sand and listen to Trump's stump speech - in short you will hear hate, fear and ridiculous promises, if you listen. One example can be, and in this case is, instructive, but only for those who apply sagacious reasoning to the issue.

You are the one making an extreme claim.

Back it up with a transcript, if you can.

Otherwise, you are just engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion combined with a Godwin at that, which is a FAIL, and thus my point stands.

 

[Correll]

In 12 pages no one has been able to rebut the general concept of the OP. In fact every effort by Conservatives result in more evidence in support of the claim that conservatives are defined by what they oppose,

Is it any wonder The Congress under the control of McConnell and Boehner/Ryan have done nothing of substance since gaining control.

YOu are talking crazy.

Have you heard of wikipedia?

They have a nice article on American conservatism.

Conservatism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"American Conservatism is a broad system of political beliefs in the United States that is characterized by respect for American traditions, support for Judeo-Christian values, economic liberalism, anti-communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western culture from perceived threats posed by creeping socialism, moral relativism, multiculturalism, and liberal internationalism. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, limiting the size and scope of government, and opposition to high taxes and to government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur. American conservatives consider individual liberty, within the bounds of conformity to American values as the fundamental trait of democracy, which contrasts with modern American liberals, who generally place a greater value on equality and social justice."





YOur pretense of ignorance on this is silly.

Today's brand of conservative would be attacked by William F. Buckley as he attacked the John Birch Society decades ago, calling it an extremist organization. Many well known conservatives have spoken out against the New Right and Trump, and even today Colin Powell called Trump a "National Disgrace".

That fact that deporting illegal aliens, and bring back manufacturing jobs and NOT fucking with Russia, is seen as "extremist" or "disgraceful" shows that there is a problem with this nation as a whole.


And TRump is the answer.


And regardless, you asked what Conservatives support, and I posted the answer.


Cease your nonsensical claims now.

I don't take kindly to orders from anonymous sources on the Internet, especially those who read my comments with a bias, and then respond with a wiki definition which is not relevant to the contemporary iteration of 21st. century conservatism.

IMO, 21st. century conservatism is akin to fascism. You may of course disagree, but calling this claim nonsensical is not a rebuttal, it's a logical fallacy.

The 20th century was 16 years ago.


Trump's core platform is nearly identical to Patrick Buchanan's from 92 and 96.


Patrick Buchanan, in case you are unaware, was already old then, and is certainly from 20th century conservatism.


Hell, I'M from 20th century conservatism and I support TRump and his message.


Your dismissal of my link is a weak dodge.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Please define "Traditions" and "Values" in terms of universal "T's" & "V's" by time and place.

Was Article 48 of the Weimer Republic not imposed to provide Law & Order in Germany,

"On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was named Chancellor of Germany. Lacking a majority in theReichstag, Hitler formed a coalition with the Nationalists. Not long afterwards, he called elections for March 5. Six days before the election, on February 27, the Reichstag fire damaged the house of Parliament in Berlin. Claiming that the fire was the first step in a Communist revolution, the Nazis used the fire as a pretext to get the President, Hindenburg, to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, officially theVerordnung des Reichspräsidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Presidential Decree for the Protection of People and State)."

Article 48 (Weimar Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, your point is that since ONCE, a long time ago, a bad man abused the desire of people for Law and Order, that it is bad of conservatives to support Law and Order now?

That seems to be what you were implying. But I hate to respond and then have lefties play silly evasive games.

Could you clearly state your intended point to avoid any possible misunderstanding, real or pretend?

I was not implying, I posted an example of how laws were abused and "order" was a euphemism for Authoritarianism. Anyone who listened to Trump's stump speech (not those written by his new handler) heard words of a fascist, a demagogue and a charlatan.

Only if you believe that ONE historical example demonstrates that that is the ONLY POSSIBLE scenario.


Which is utterly ridiculous.

Using that "logic" the fact the ONE planet, Earth, has life on it, that would mean that ALL planets have life on them.

Or that ONE apple was poisoned by an evil witch, that means ALL apples have been poisoned by evil witches.

You are utterly ridiculous.

Get your head out of the sand and listen to Trump's stump speech - in short you will hear hate, fear and ridiculous promises, if you listen. One example can be, and in this case is, instructive, but only for those who apply sagacious reasoning to the issue.

You are the one making an extreme claim.

Back it up with a transcript, if you can.

Otherwise, you are just engaged in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion combined with a Godwin at that, which is a FAIL, and thus my point stands.

One extreme example today of your unhinged nominee:

Trump: Clinton's bodyguards should drop guns and 'see what happens to her'

What if Trump changed the target from HRC to the Pope or Wayne LaPierre? Be honest, if you can.