AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Left wing socialist liberals are racists because they repeatedly call all right wingers racists.

You contend that ALL racism is based on hate.
I say that isnt true.

EVERYONE is a racist of one sort or another.
It may be because of a cultural bias, it may be from ignorance (and I mean lack of knowledge), or it may be simply because someone is an ass.

For you to claim that ALL racism is based on hatred shows a large lack of understanding of racism, IMHO.

For the record, I did not make the statement Thomas is attributing to me here.

Thomas- It would appear that Affirmative Action, which has been utilized for nearly 40 years in the USA and, from time to time, been reduced in scope by the US Supreme Court, would, by this time, have produced legions of Black PhD's in Science, Math, and Computer Science. Any review of the race of Phd's in the USA will reveal that blacks, even after 40 years of artificial advancement under Affirmative Action, have not done very well.

The Republican Party that is in such disrepute today is not the party of Reagan. It is the party of Rush Limbaugh, of Ann Coulter, of Newt Gingrich, of George W. Bush, of Karl Rove. It is not a conservative party, it is a party built on the blind and narrow pursuit of power.

"When we MACs raise up another leader with the common sense and vision of a Newt Gingrich..."

Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism[1], laissez-faire liberalism[2], market liberalism[3] or, outside the United States and Britain, sometimes simply liberalism) is a doctrine stressing individual freedom and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, individual freedom from restraint, constitutional limitation of government, free markets, and a gold standard to place fiscal constraints on government[4] as exemplified in the writings of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo, Voltaire, Montesquieu and others. As such, it is the fusion of economic liberalism with political liberalism of the late 18th and 19th centuries.[2] The "normative core" of classical liberalism is the idea that laissez-faire economics will bring about a spontaneous order or invisible hand that benefits the society,[5] though it does not necessarily oppose the state's provision of some basic public goods with what constitutes public goods being seen as very limited.[6] The qualification classical was applied retroactively to distinguish it from more recent, 20th-century conceptions of liberalism and its related movements, such as social liberalism[7], which promotes a more interventionist role for the state in economic matters. Classical liberals are suspicious of all but the most minimal government[8] and object to the welfare state[9].

Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Milton Friedman, are credited with influencing a revival of classical liberalism in the twentieth century after it fell out of favor beginning in the late nineteenth century and much of the twentieth century.[10][11] In relation to economic issues, this revival is sometimes referred to, mainly by its opponents, as "neoliberalism". The German "ordoliberalism" has a whole different meaning, since the likes of Alexander Rüstow and Wilhelm Röpke have advocated a more interventionist state, as opposed to laissez-faire liberals[12][13]. Classical liberalism has many aspects in common with modern libertarianism, with the terms being used almost interchangeably by those who support limited government.[14][15]