55
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 11:29 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

Let me ask you Fox, Do you see conservatism as a moderate viewpoint or a far right one?


Conservatism is a basic concept, not a strict point of view. There might be one or two, but I can't think of any conservative concept that would be considered left of center, but conservatism, as I understand it, is neither so-called 'neo-con' or 'far right'. It would depend on how you would define moderate as to whether any of conservatism would fit there.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 11:33 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

I find it interesting that you take ican's word for the meaning of the constituiton vs someone that actually has taught the meaning and studied the law.

It really says something about conservatives if this is your standard practice of ignoring those that know what it is and resorting to some BS about what it should be. You are nothing better than a tax protesting militia movement if that is your take on the constitution.


I'm sorry now that I responded to your more respectful question. As with two or three others, I didn't intend to respond to your posts any more until you got over your childish insult tantrums.

Actually Ican and I have disagreed quite a bit on points in the Constitution, but I find it interesting that you interpreted what I said here as taking Ican's word about it. (I am pretty darn sure, after observing both over the last couple of years, though, that Ican and I agree on a whole lot more about the basics of the Constitution than Obama and I agree on that though.)
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 11:51 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

What I actually wanted to do, fox, was to give you some tools and encouragement in order that you might be able to reflect and begin to rebuild what has gone so terribly wrong and ugly in your movement and country.

But to have you place Limbaugh as exemplar of 'conservatism' and Frum (or Powell or the others) as deviants from conservatism's traditions and proper future is so far over the edge that I cannot imagine why I would engage you here.


And you don't comb through whatever comes up on the internet that you can use to insult or smear somebody you don't like and/or to illustrate your opinion so that you don't actually have to defend your own opinion? And you are the superior judge of who is qualified to speak the truth of course? And, it is fair game to completely exaggerate and misrepresent points made when that is necessary in order to discredit them? That's cool. At least you are consistent.

Carry on.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 12:00 pm
@Foxfyre,
Well, you may well think that this piece from Hitchens follows my pattern of posts then...
Quote:
This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity.
http://slate.com/id/2203120

ps...to those other than foxfyre, the entire piece is well worth reading
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 12:21 pm
Who knows what you'll think about this (rather relevant piece) foxfyre but I hardly care.

Quote:
There was a feeling of euphoria in Britain that morning, a feeling of freshness and change. Even people who hadn't voted for Blair were caught up in it. Many of them wished that they had, and his poll rating soared. Much of the good feeling about new Labour was generated in the months after their landslide, oddly, rather than in the months before it.

And here's the lesson for Tories. The hardest thing to absorb was this - we didn't matter.

For the first time in years the story wasn't about us, and our squabbles and intrigues seemed oddly silly and pointless. And we, especially those of us who had worked on the losing campaign, felt excluded from a great national party. It was a little bit like sitting in the gloomy train Woody Allen films in Stardust Memories, while in the happy train everyone is popping champagne corks.

The first step towards recovery for the Conservative party was to stop thinking that we were the centre of the universe and that what we thought mattered more than what others thought.

The Republicans are about to go through a period of self absorption and will think it is all that matters. They will only recover when they start to understand that no one is watching and that no one, except them, cares.

That realisation will be more painful than the battles themselves.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 02:50 pm
@Foxfyre,
Thanks for proving my point.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 02:57 pm
@Foxfyre,
I asked where YOU view it Fox.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 04:31 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:
And you don't comb through whatever comes up on the internet that you can use to insult or smear somebody you don't like and/or to illustrate your opinion so that you don't actually have to defend your own opinion?

This sounds 99% of the attacks on Obama. Fox, you're in no place to lecture.

T
K
O
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 04:40 pm
Joe the Plumber, out at a campaign rally with McCain, says he agrees with rally attendants question, that "Yeah, a vote for Obama is a vote for the death of Israel."

Sarah and Joe and McCain. Conservatives in the best mould.

Joe's advice (later, on Fox, in an interview that the Fox interviewer ought to be proud of) to Americans, "Go out and get informed".

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 07:21 pm
@Diest TKO,
Diest TKO wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
And you don't comb through whatever comes up on the internet that you can use to insult or smear somebody you don't like and/or to illustrate your opinion so that you don't actually have to defend your own opinion?

This sounds 99% of the attacks on Obama. Fox, you're in no place to lecture.

T
K
O

Terrible smears of Obama, such as playing tapes of what he said in recent years. Thats terrible, just terrible, how could they smear the man like that, the nerve to play his own words, that just is not fair.
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 08:25 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

Terrible smears of Obama, such as playing tapes of what he said in recent years. Thats terrible, just terrible, how could they smear the man like that, the nerve to play his own words, that just is not fair.

Not exactly. They played his words but, like with the Joe the Plumber nonsense, edited out parts. Then they offered their interpretation of those words which was, to say the least, not an obvious interpretation base on what he actually said, even in the edited version.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 08:28 pm
@FreeDuck,
Look, Free Duck, is there any doubt now that Obama is a socialist / Marxist at heart by now? Face it, people, the truth is staring you in the face. This is not based upon isolated snippets, quotes here and there. The dots are now becoming connected into a more clear picture, and the picture is pretty plain to see, if you have any eyes to see them. Now, if you are a socialist and believe in Marxist ideas, and like Obama's past work, his friends and associates, then vote Obama. I don't and I won't.
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 08:40 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

Look, Free Duck, is there any doubt now that Obama is a socialist / Marxist at heart by now?

Yes, there is doubt. And there is no evidence, and I do mean none, that he is socialist or Marxist.

Quote:
Face it, people, the truth is staring you in the face. This is not based upon isolated snippets, quotes here and there. The dots are now becoming connected into a more clear picture, and the picture is pretty plain to see, if you have any eyes to see them.

Yes, in much the same way that I can pick any random newspaper article and extract letters from it to spell naughty words. You don't want truth, you want validation of your ingrained biases and fears. And for that, cherry picking words and lopping off context is just the ticket. I do hope you enjoy yourself.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 08:57 pm
@FreeDuck,
We hear alot about connecting the dots, Free Duck, and there are alot of dots. We also know that leftists, socialists, Marxists, cannot and will not be honest and be able to win at the same time, so that is where we are at. I admit my suspicions are giving way to conclusions in regard to Obama, but suspicions are enough to prevent me from ever voting for Obama, even if the suspicions don't become totally realized, they are not without grounds, no way. And how are we to know, without honesty? I've read his book, watched virtually every debate, looked at his website, studied his church, and have read alot about the man, and none of it convinces me that I am barking up the wrong tree, in fact it all tends to confirm my suspicions. Now, I cannot predict how he evolves as a politician from this day forward, but if his past is any indicator at all, and that is all we have, then all I can say is, you can't say you were not warned. The man is a smooth talker, but anyone that would vote for Obama based on what he says now, I think is being very foolish indeed.
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Oct, 2008 11:13 pm
@okie,
Obama isn't a socialist or a Marxist you unripe idiot. You prove my point definitively as you continue to smear him with such unfounded brands. Get a clue.

You just want you worst suspicions to be confirmed, and you will bury your fingers in your ears so deep your fingernails will touch to keep yourself safe from any information which would prove you wrong. In the end it's just your ego having a hard time admitting you are wrong.

T
K
O
okie
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 29 Oct, 2008 09:32 am
@Diest TKO,
Diest, you are either very naive, or you are just as dishonest as Obama about what he believes. Read his book, listen to him, get a clue, connect the dots.

Suspicions, conclusions, whatever, one question remains, who is Obama? I don't know, and I doubt you know, or even Obama knows. All I can do is judge from his actions and some words when they slip, because you certainly cannot depend upon what he says now, I would almost guarantee that.
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Oct, 2008 09:35 am
@okie,
Did you happen to read at any time about his leadership at the Harvard Law Review? I think his actions put the lie to your suspicions.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Oct, 2008 09:39 am
@okie,
Another chapter in the book of "because okie says so."

You aren't claiming to "not know who Obama is." On the contrary, you claim to know exactly who he is and you litter up the forum with your non-fact brand of rhetoric.

I feel very comfortable with who Obama is, and I've listen and read plenty to come to my conclusion. Your not interested in finding out Obama is just another family man who worked hard to get an education and has a strong sense of civil responsibility, you are only interested in designing an image of Obama that you or someone else will fear.

T
K
O
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Oct, 2008 09:46 am
@Diest TKO,
Who is Okie, Diest? That's the question.

See, I think that he's secretly a marxist terrorist. If you believe him when he says he's not, well, you're just being naive. Suspicions, suspicions, suspicions. He could act totally differently in real life then he does on the board. People deserve to know the truth about him.

I think that several years of posting has only allowed him to hide who he truly is. He's a cipher, an empty digital suit. Nobody can really know him.

That's why you should vote for his opponent instead, because hey - that guy is an open book to anyone who asks.

Cycloptichorn
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Oct, 2008 09:52 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Yeah. Who is he? He slips up all the time and I think he's more extreme than he lets on. He doesn't see a problem that he pals around with trolls either. I think A2K deserves to know who the REAL okie is.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 01/13/2025 at 02:40:56