AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@BillW,

BillW wrote:

Conservative lies will not prevail.

Are you banking on Democratic lies to prevail? I would agree they have a better chance than conservative truths prevailing, because the mainstream media always supports the Democrats. I wonder how many AARP supported sob story ads will we have to endure before the next election is over?

1 Reply

@okie,

AARP is your basis for arriving at your conclusions? No wonder you fail to understand anything! FYI, the AARP is not the US government.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Except for recall referendums (I seem to remember one recently in your home state) the ability of citizens to directly and legally control elected officials is limited to regularly scheduled elections, and then only to the extent of preventing them from serving any future terms.

This is what happened in 2010 and was, in part, a direct result of the public perception that the Democrats didn't care what the citizenry wanted.

Every election cycle one or both parties spin the truth around the policies of their opponents. Surely you don't believe that Democrats have never lied or stretched the truth about Republican policies. You are selling Americans far short if you believe that our elections turn solely on partisan spin.

Quote:

The GOP is good is misleading the American people, which I believe is more dangerous than our government.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Are you saying that you believe the American people are more dangerous than our government, or the GOP is? Are you referring solely to our current government or the institution in general?

The OMB simply reversed its originally flawed calculations. The original flaws were due to the fact that the OMB must assume that Congress will follow through on what their legislation promises. For example, imposing taxes on so-called cadillac healthcare programs. The OMB doesn't get to call "bullshit!"

Well, I agree that the Republican's goal to repeal it is a problem for Obamacare, and the Democrats, but not because it will actually be repealed in the next two years. There is a scenario for a full repeal, but it counts too heavily on Democrats in red states feeling highly vulnerable in 2012.

Instead, the House will whittle away at it through amendments and defunding, and they will try and force Democrats to vote for it over and over again. If voting for it didn't help them in 2010, voting to keep it as is will certainly not in 2012.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn, Elections are won and lost by both parties who seems to be the least dangerous to our democracy at the moment. Perceptions of people differ by degree based on subjective knowledge that changes with time which can often be wrong. That's the fact of the matter whether we wish to acknowledge that truth or not.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

...they managed to get major reform bills passed. Surely a group who displayed the Greatest ineptness wouldn't have seen such successes.

True if losing the House and weakening their positions in the Senate and White House were accepted consequences, but of course they weren't.

Quote:

I think the reality of governance is already colliding with various bold statements and promises the Republicans and Tea Partiers made, even in the first few days of the new Republican House. It will be interesting to see how they respond to the challenges of this year - and to the fact that Obama will likely be much more confrontational with them in an election environment than he was before.

Republicans control the House, not the government, and they gained that control because the citizenry was looking for a way to put the brakes on the Democrats' Progressive agenda.

If they pass a series of common sense bills for spending reductions that are then killed by the Senate or the president, then it will be the Democrats who will be perceived as the Party of No.

In your study of the first few days of the new congress, you seem to have missed the fact that Obama is already tacking to the center (His choice for his new Chief of Staff and his surrender on the Bush tax cuts are prime evidence) so that there will be less confrontations with Republicans; not more.

There is no reason to believe that the Republican strategy for the next two years is guaranteed success, but they finally have one and it is based more on conservative principles than any mock-up they had during the Bush years.

As I said, the next two years will be interesting.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Finn, Elections are won and lost by both parties who seems to be the least dangerous to our democracy at the moment. Perceptions of people differ by degree based on subjective knowledge that changes with time which can often be wrong. That's the fact of the matter whether we wish to acknowledge that truth or not.

I don't necessarily disagree with this statement, but I'm still unclear as to what you believe is more dangerous than our government, and if by "our government" you mean the current Administration.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Personally, I don't fear our government, but I disagree with many of the decisions made by this president and congress.

That all levels of government don't have the cahones to control spending at a time when we have such high unemployment rates, drop in tax revenues, and increase in debts, it's not good for anybody. However, I support the idea of extended unemployment benefits for the unemployed; if we can spend billions on wars in foreign countries, we have the responsibility to feed our own citizens who have paid their taxes when they worked.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Fear of our government is a paranoid attempt to get 2nd amendment redemies from broderline individuals by Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and many of the Republican Senator, members of the House of Representatives and even activist Right Wing Justices in the Supreme Court. I have said often that this will come back and haunt us...................

That is

Quote:

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

in America today.

2 Replies

@BillW,

It is time now for the main stream and moderate Republican to step forward, say, "Enough is enough, this lunacy has to stop and I disavow it and those that espouse it!". If not, they should be history - in an election, of course. The Palins, Brewers, Angles and their bretheren of the world are no more!

0 Replies

I think the phrase "fear of our government" puts the wrong focus on the matter.

We founded a Federal government with limited, specific, and eneumerated powers. This has long been a core element of the American exceptionalism, which our President does not appear to recognize. It has been very well described by Alexis DeToqueville in his "Democracy in America", written in the 1830s. The original emphasis was on the central role of local government and constitutional principles that gave the Federal government primacy in its role, but set strict limits on that role and the domain of its powers.

The current Administration, led by the ideas of the Progressive Democrat movement is guided by different central ideas, namely an emphasis on solving social and economic problems through the direct regulation and control of a vastly expanded Federal government. While one can argue about the different merits of the two conflicting world views, the fact is that many Americans correctly see and fear the policies of the current government as a fundamental change to long-held principles. There is nothing paranoid in that.

I agree that since FDR some elements of the progressive doctrine have become accepted elements of our government and our lives. However, that doesn't mean that the underlying issue is dead or that many Americans don't want more of it. Indeed it is very clear that many want to reverse some of what we have.

1 Reply

@BillW,

BillW wrote:

Fear of our government is a paranoid attempt.......

Strange opinion, Bill, considering our founders wrote the constitution with the idea that too much government was to be feared. Did you not learn that in school? The fact is that the Bill of Rights is written largely to protect us and our rights and property from government. Do you think the authors of the constitution were paranoid? I rather think they were very realistic and they understood human nature and the tendencies of other governments in history.

1 Reply

@okie,

Once again, you have major problem with reading cognition, you need grave mental help, find it dude!

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

The current Administration, led by the ideas of the Progressive Democrat movement is guided by different central ideas, namely an emphasis on solving social and economic problems through the direct regulation and control of a vastly expanded Federal government.

Excellent overall post, george, but I quote the above sentence because I think it captures one of the primary differences between liberalism or "leftism" compared to the conservative philosophy of smaller and more decentralized government, along with maximizing personal rights and responsibilities.

I cannot help but observe that your above post directly supports the logical conclusion that Hitler and the Nazi's were leftists, by virtue of the fact that they believed in a strong central government to solve their nation's social and economic problems through direct regulation and control, at the expense of personal freedom and liberty. As the Time Magazine article explained in January of 1939, the capitalists in Germany also learned that free market capitalism was also expendable in favor of the all powerful Nazi State.

I apologize for not letting this subject go, but I persist because I believe so strongly in the principles involved here, and also that I believe you are such a reasonable guy that you will eventually have to admit to the truths that I keep pointing out here.

2 Replies

@okie,

The Time magazine article bears reposting a quote and the link to the entire article.
http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id10.html
"Hitler was named "Man of the Year" in 1938 by Time Magazine. They noted Hitler's anti-capitalistic economic policies:
"Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."
(Source: Time Magazine; Jaunuary 2, 1939.)"

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Obamacare was shoved through congress despite numerous polls showing that the majority of Americans didn't want it.

The majority of Americans want single payer. Obamacare, modeled on Romneycare, was a compromise.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Have you ever participated in an AARP forum? Those old coots -- mostly illiterate -- make okie/ican look progressive.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

he ability of citizens to directly and legally control elected officials is limited to regularly scheduled elections, and then only to the extent of preventing them from serving any future terms.

The Vietnam War was brought to an end by the will of the American people. Ditto Jim Crow laws and separate but equal. Once the American people understand an issue, they generally take the progressive side.

The Tea Totalitarians are just the first wave and the first wave is usually composed of know nothings.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

I cannot help but observe that your above post directly supports the logical conclusion that Hitler and the Nazi's were leftists, by virtue of the fact that they believed in a strong central government to solve their nation's social and economic problems through direct regulation and control, at the expense of personal freedom and liberty. As the Time Magazine article explained in January of 1939, the capitalists in Germany also learned that free market capitalism was also expendable in favor of the all powerful Nazi State.

Nonsense ! It demonstrates that they are authoritarian, like the kings of an earlier era, the Directory of the French revolution or Napoleon who followed them, or the 19th century Bismark government of Germany, or the tyrannies of Hitler or Stalin in the 20th century.

I have chosen examples from both the left and the right as you would define them. However, I don't expect that to deter you. You simply ignore these and other facts that confound your twisted arguments.

Once again you are attempting to force a reality that involves at least two degreees of freedom (independent coordinates) on a theoretical model that provides only one. It can't be done without the confusion and contradictions that so beset all of your attempts to defend the indefensible.

3 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob, Can't you see the "logical conclusions" of okie's thesis? LOL

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Quote:
Obamacare was shoved through congress despite numerous polls showing that the majority of Americans didn't want it.
The majority of Americans want single payer. Obamacare, modeled on Romneycare, was a compromise.

Whatever happened to our rights as individuals in this country? Are we now at the mercy of the tyranny of the majority? By the way, can you cite a poll that indicates Americans want single payer government health care?

2 Replies

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know