AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

I'm ashamed of you TKO. Okay?

That's about all I can come up with at the moment.

I didn't run for any office, and you wouldn't vote for me if I had. You've got to come to terms with who the people YOU choose to represent you are, not who you want them to be.

I don't need to adjust for your embarrassment. Why should I have to tell an adult how to sleep in the bed they made?

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Certainly worth reading, this editorial by Buchanan from September last year.
(I wonder, why some most invent new identities when sending such?)

See entry at snopes

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Certainly worth reading, this editorial by Buchanan from September last year.
(I wonder, why some most invent "new identities" when sending such?)

See entry at snopes

1 Reply

MAL is a malignancy and MAC is a cure.

MAL(i.e., Modern American Liberalism) is a malignancy to our economy and to our culture. It encourages coveting, theft, and dependency. It is currently setting the foundation for an eventual socialist dictatorship wherein the only people who benefit are those who are part of the leadership of that dictatorship.

Advocates of MAL appear to think that limiting how much other people can accomplish will make their lives better. Actually, limiting how much other people can accomplish makes everyone's life worse. The truth is minimizing such limits and expanding everyone's potential for accomplishment will make everyone's life better. That is what MAC is all about.

One does not expand everyone's potential for accomplishment by coveting what they have, encouraging them to covet, by stealing what they have, or by making them dependent on others. One expands everyone's potential for accomplishment by teaching them to root for, emulate and honor those who accomplish improvements. One does not benefit from denigrating good ideas because they are not yet widely accepted. One benfits from the wise implementation of good ideas.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Thanks for the correction Walter. I should have checked since I get a lot of crap attributed to people who didn't write or say it almost every day. At least Snopes figured out who did write this one and if we put the correct author on the piece, it is still a good piece with just a couple of things there I would disagree with.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

McTag was dead on in his assessment of you, Ican. Have you been sleeping for the last 20 years?

2 Replies

@ican711nm,

ican711nm wrote:

MAL is a malignancy and MAC is a cure.

MAL(i.e., Modern American Liberalism) is a malignancy to our economy and to our culture. It encourages coveting, theft, and dependency. It is currently setting the foundation for an eventual socialist dictatorship wherein the only people who benefit are those who are part of the leadership of that dictatorship.

Advocates of MAL appear to think that limiting how much other people can accomplish will make their lives better. Actually, limiting how much other people can accomplish makes everyone's life worse. The truth is minimizing such limits and expanding everyone's potential for accomplishment will make everyone's life better. That is what MAC is all about.

One does not expand everyone's potential for accomplishment by coveting what they have, encouraging them to covet, by stealing what they have, or by making them dependent on others. One expands everyone's potential for accomplishment by teaching them to root for, emulate and honor those who accomplish improvements. One does not benefit from denigrating good ideas because they are not yet widely accepted. One benfits from the wise implementation of good ideas.

Well done. But to get into the spirit of the debate here, you need to request the MAL members on the board to defend their leaders for embracing MALism and what are they ashamed of if they don't do that?

Most seem to think that the only pertinent point to discuss here is how we should be ashamed that our leaders have not embraced MACism of which none of them approve. Of course I thought that's what we've been complaining about all along that our elected leaders have so often abandoned the principles that made this country great. I rather thought I made that clear in the opening post of the thread.

0 Replies

@JTT,

How can anyone be asleep if they're already brain-dead? LOL

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Quote:

Stop it with the victim act. You embarrass yourself. Won't be drawn into a "bashing" of conservatives eh? You really do sound like you're prepared to "defend every principle." What I've seen now for a great deal of time is you request a challenge, fail to meet it, pose as a victim, then act as if it's below you to address the criticisms presented to you.

If MAC is all about principles that don't get played out, then it's just a bunch of talk and a waste of time. You just keep voting for Republicans that not only fall outside of your definition, but some who fully contradict it. They LOVE you for it.

100% correct in your assessment of both the situation modern Conservatives find themselves in, and in your assessment of Fox's debating style in particular.

Frank,

I engage in these discussions, because I feel that applying the Rake to arguments help get to the truth of the matter. And also because I consider pretty much all of our conversations on A2K to be frivolous in nature.

I suppose I also just have a hard time swallowing Fox's bullshit. Glaring contradictions between the theory and the acutality of Conservatism just don't seem to bother her much.

One would think that a reformation of the Conservative thought and principle in America would start with a frank assessment of the problems that the Republican party and the Conservative movement face, but instead, we are treated to a paen to Conservatives and the pretension that if people were only more conservative, everything would be just great.

I believe that it is a serious case of cognitive dissonance. And what we are seeing is the modern version of what the Republicans went through in the 30's.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Quote:

The only really insulting thing in that is that you are as bad as Cyclop. You condemn an entire ideology without providing any example or credible evidence to support your opinion. How is one to see that then, other than as prejudice based on emotion/fear/bias/etc.?

Foxfyre...American conservatism is a fraud. A HUGE FRAUD!

That is why you see so many conservative columnists and writers like you talking about “real conservatism” all the time.

It's like this “real American values” crap.

REAL AMERICAN CONSERVATISM, Foxfyre, appears to be about 1% of the population...a tiny minority who have suck up to some of the most vile people in our country in order to get heard at all.

Without some of the scum of the earth...American conservatism could hold national conventions in local Elk's Clubs.

Don't you get it???

There are two elements of this disgusting political philosophy that cement my loathing of it"the racists (which include the misogynists and the xenophobes) and the super-hypocritical element of Christianity. Those two elements disgust me...and they should disgust you too. They should disgust anybody with a sense of decency.

But the hard fact is that if American conservatism were rid of all its racists, misogynists, and xenophobes"and the hypocritical Christians...it would be a joke.

The Libertarians would look like a major influence compared with it.

Not sure why you keep accusing me...and the others...of not giving examples of why we think American conservatism sucks...but I have. Right here. And so have the others.

Let me spell it out again: I see American conservatism as a fraud...as a political philosophy that counts on scum to inflate its numbers in order to influence policy...and the only way it can keep the scum on board is to cater to the demented wants of that scum. American conservatism, Foxfyre, will never amount to anything more than a laughably small minority without the inclusion of the racists, misogynists, xenophobes, and the intensely hypocritical element of Christianity.

That is why I despise it. That is what I have told you before.

Really...stop saying that you are not getting this information.

It is here!

And so that I do not have to go though this again: I am not saying that all conservatives are racists...or that all conservatives are hypocritical Christians...but I am saying that without the inclusion of the racists and the hypocrites...conservatism is a drop in the political bucket.

Please do not take any of this to mean that I think you should stop or amend anything you are doing here. Please keep your efforts going.

1 Reply

Well when the peanut gallery gets through with the ad hominems and personally directed insults here and get back to debating the topic, or somebody shows up who actually wants to discuss the topic, I'll be back.

(I still say liberals must drink a different brand of water or something that contains a drug that makes them unable to discuss anything without accusing or insulting their opponent. They gotta be deluded to think I see myself as the victim though when it is them who are doing all the whining and complaining about the topic because it doesn't fit the definition they want it to be. Smile

)

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

American conservatism, Foxfyre, will never amount to anything more than a laughably small minority without the inclusion of the racists, misogynists, xenophobes, and the intensely hypocritical element of Christianity.

Well, it's a big tent, yaknow? Laughing

Fox ought to include the part about Modern Conservatism co-opting the Religious movement in America over the abortion issue. Their leaders continually fan the flame of the fire in order to use the wedge. The majority of the 'fiscal conservatives' couldn't give two shits about abortion, in the same fashion that they don't give two shits about anything that doesn't lead to more money for them and their friends.

Let me reiterate; while I think there are some logical inconsistencies and 'fuzzy areas' in the philosophy put forth by Fox and Ican, it isn't a bad philosophy. The major problem with it is that it doesn't describe American Conservatives.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Ican. Have you been sleeping for the last 20 years?

Off and on for the last 77 years.

When not sleeping, I sometimes fly above the mess the MALs have been making ever since 1913. With each flight the minimum safe altitude is higher.

To date, Fanny & Freddy and their consequences are by far the greatest enhancement of the mess the MALs have made in the last 20 years. Attempts to save rather than bankrupt Fanny & Freddy will greatly enhance that mess and not even save Fanny & Freddy.

The MAC population must be greatly increased before anything significiant can be done to end the mess made and continuing to be made by MALs and their RINO and CINO allies.

Which of the MAL leaders do MALs think are the biggest causes of the MAL mess?

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

No ad hominems in my last post, Foxfyre.

You can respond to that one right now.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Poor, poor, Foxie, the victim.

0 Replies

Frank writes

Quote:

Let me spell it out again: I see American conservatism as a fraud...as a political philosophy that counts on scum to inflate its numbers in order to influence policy...and the only way it can keep the scum on board is to cater to the demented wants of that scum. American conservatism, Foxfyre, will never amount to anything more than a laughably small minority without the inclusion of the racists, misogynists, xenophobes, and the intensely hypocritical element of Christianity.

You are spelling out what you think Frank, and I have accepted that as your opinion, but you have not provided a single example or any credible evidence to support what you think. And until you can provide such an example, I have to see your opinion as irrationally based on prejudice alone.

For instance, what makes valuing personal responsibility and accountability scum? That is a MAC principle.

What makes valuing small limited government scum? That is a MAC principle.

What makes free trade scum? That is a MAC principle.

What makes that the original interpretation of the Constitution should prevail scum? That is a MAC principle.

What makes valuing allowing people ability to order their own lives as much as possible without government dictating that to them? That is a MAC principle.

Somebody started a thread awhile back re a fringe Baptist group picketing and using sign boards and catcalling insults to gay people saying stuff like God doesn't love them or they're going to hell. I think every active member who describes himself/herself as a conservative chimed in on that thread and not a single one of us condoned that group. That group is not MAC. That group is fringe extremist and will not be receiving any praise or acceptance from any MACs anywhere. That group is anathema to what MACs believe and stand for.

But you seem to want to peg anybody who is not liberal into that kind of hole.

But you're wrong to do that.

Until you can take any point within that description of MAC posted earlier today and rationally explain how it is wrong or misguided or evil or hateful or anything that should make us not want to embrace it, I have to believe that your contempt of any expression of conservatism is based on prejudice rather than on anything that can be defended.

(NOTE: "Prejudice" is not intended to be perjorative here but is simply an observation. There are none of us who don't hold some prejudices re this or that.)

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Everybody else has "opinions." LOL

0 Replies

Why not just go with Hannity's insight?

Quote:

[Rush Limbaugh] has been the defining voice of conservatism in this country.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Well Hannity's conservatism is what he describes as Reagan Conservatism which I mostly describe as MAC. But Hannity is right that Rush was the first to go national with any kind of clear conservative voice and he set the bar for conservative commentary. And as yet, I have never heard Rush express an opinion about policy/procedure/values that would not fit within my definition of MAC; therefore I see Rush as a MAC albeit a one who is controversial because of his particular brand of humor and particular style that liberals usually despise and many conservatives do not appreciate. Rush is sometimes overly harsh in his assessment of individuals and sometimes wanders into poor taste on his show, and he doesn't always size stuff up correctly I think, but his concept of conservative principles are MAC principles.

But in order to turn THAT into a perjorative, one would have to take one of Rush's policy statements, dissect it, and show how it fits Frank's impression of conservatism.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Well, now, we all know where Foxie stands on our new president:

Quote:

Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Rush Limbaugh wants Obama to fail
Rush Limbaugh, is a big, fat, ugly, white guy with no heart and no brain. So, whatever he says is not surprising. It is usually mean-spirited, false, untrue, nasty, idiotic, stupid, cruel, etc., but it is not surprising.

Limbaugh thinks the inauguration of President Barack Obama was a miserable failure, a flop, a joke, nothing more than another campaign event. Heh, heh.

He has a right to his opinion, of course, in spite of the fact that millions of people around the world would heartily disagree, but that's only the beginning.

Limbaugh wants President Obama to fail as president. Here's what he said on his radio show last Friday:

"I disagree fervently with the people on our [Republican] side of the aisle who have caved and who say, ‘Well, I hope he succeeds.’”

Then he mentioned he had been asked by “a major American print publication” to offer a 400-word statement explaining his “hope for the Obama presidency.” He responded:

"So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, 'Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four. I hope he fails."

0 Replies

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know