AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

HOW does it appeal to racists Frank?

What is there within all those conservative principles we have thus far identified that is in any way comfortable specifically to racists? What do you suggest MACs do to repel the racists? What CAN or SHOULD Modern American Conservatives do that would make themselves unattractive to racists?

But again, if you are going to judge Modern American Conservatism on the fact that you think it includes racists, are you as willing to condemn Modern American Liberalism because it seems to appeal to environmental wackos

...socialists, young communists...

...vandals, saboteurs...

Anti-Americans...

Holocaust deniers

... and racists?

Quote:

HOW does it appeal to racists Frank?

MY GUESS: They think the conservative agenda does a hell of a lot more to further their racism than does a centrist or liberal agenda. You might ask some racists why they are conservatives.

Quote:

What is there within all those conservative principles we have thus far identified that is in any way comfortable specifically to racists? What do you suggest MACs do to repel the racists? What CAN or SHOULD Modern American Conservatives do that would make themselves unattractive to racists?

I guess they are all questions you ought to be asking yourself...and your fellow conservatives.

Quote:

But again, if you are going to judge Modern American Conservatism on the fact that you think it includes racists, are you as willing to condemn Modern American Liberalism because it seems to appeal to environmental wackos

Hell no...I am what you conservative wackos consider an environmental wacko myself. I'm just not a liberal.

Quote:

...socialists, young communists...

Wht in the hell would I have any trouble with socialists or young communists? I've mentioned many times that I am an admirer of the teachings of Jesus...and Jesus arguably was both. Nothing wrong at all with being a socialist or a communist (young or old). I think there is more honor in either of those than being an American conservative.

Quote:

...vandals, saboteurs...

If you have some proof that liberalism appeals to vandals or saboteurs...lemme have it. In fact, you really don't have to bother. Any appeal liberalism has for vandals and saboteurs ought to be expunged. Personally I thought most vandals and saboteurs were libertarians and anarchists.

Quote:

Anti-Americans...

anti-Americans find liberalism appealing???? C'mon! The assholes on the right like to classify anybody not buying into their silly nonsense as anti-American...but that is so silly, silly, silly.

You should be ashamed of yourself for including this one.

Quote:

Holocaust deniers

Really??? New one on me. Wanna give me something solid so I know what I am confronting here?

Quote:

... and racists?

Well, if you want to torture the definition of “racist” so that you can partially rationalize the extreme racism appeal of American conservatism for the real racists of our country...I guess I can't blame you. But most of us just treat this like the joke it is.

But my challenge to you remains and you have yet to come up with a single example to illustrate your charges against Modern American Conservatism as being racist.

Quote:

But my challenge to you remains and you have yet to come up with a single example to illustrate your charges against Modern American Conservatism as being racist.

Hello, hello! Earth to Foxfyre...come in please.

Oh, well, let me assume you have landed.

I have NEVER said that Modern American Conservatism is racist.

Frankly, I don't know that I've said anything about Modern American Conservatism other than I think it is a joke you and Ican are playing on us...and that it is mostly smoke and mirrors.

And I don't think I have ever said that American Conservatism in 2008 (the subject of this thread) is racist.

I have said many, many times...that American conservatism attracts racists. I have said many, many times that every acknowledged racist I've ever known...identifies him/herself as a conservative.

If you have anything to say about what I actually said...say it. Don't make stuff up and poke fun at it, because you are just poking fun at yourself...and that looks foolish.

I have explained again...and again...and again...and again that MAC is what classical liberalism has become and explained the roots of that. You have ignored that. Why? Because it is inconvenient to a prejudiced assumption?

You keep bringing it up Frank. You said that unless MACs deal with whatever makes us attractive to racists we are (fill in the blank with your insulting adjective of choice.)

Quote:

You keep bringing it up Frank. You said that unless MACs deal with whatever makes us attractive to racists we are (fill in the blank with your insulting adjective of choice.)

Fill that blank in with any one that you've seen me use...and we'll discuss it. If not...there really is no need for it to be in here, because it smells of herring. Wonder what color it is?

Foxfyre...if you are so deluded that you do not realize that American conservatism appeals enormously to blatant racists...then I will never be able to inform you of it.

Every once in a while something comes up in this thread that makes a comment about it appropriate...and when that happens, I make the comment.

No need to get all out of sorts about it.

American conservatism, whether the brand that actually exists in the real world or this delusional variety being sold here, is an absolute piece of ****...a political philosophy that spends most of its time trying to justify and rationalize greed and lack of empathy.

Without the inclusion of the most hypocritical type of Christians imaginable (Jesus was closer to being a communist than an American conservative)...and some of the most disgusting racists, misogynists, and miscreants on the face of the planet...

...American conservatism wouldn't be a force big enough to blow a decent fart.

Its adherents are mostly deluded knee-jerkers...unable to see they are steadying the hands of people trying to cut their throats. That...and plain garden variety racists who see the conservative agenda as an extension of their own.

The people conservatives bring to office are an insult to our nation...and the idea that they take so much pleasure in wrapping themselves in our flag...insults the memory and legacy of the founding fathers they dare to pretend they resemble.
http://able2know.org/topic/113196-162#post-3559198

I truly wish your party huge luck in finally making it past its appeal to racists. America will be a better place if it succeeds.

But the only way it will ever make significant progress in that direction is to finally divorce itself from the conservative crud that is polluting it from within""because that group will not even acknowledge the problem.

We'll see how it goes.
http://able2know.org/topic/113196-164#post-3560353

Politicians of all stripe do tend to disappoint. I'll give you that.

I don't suppose it would stun you with surprise to know that the ones who bother me most these days are the Republicans and the conservatives....right?
http://able2know.org/topic/113196-167#post-3561732

But, the major thing the conservatives have going AGAINST them is that they JUST DON'T GET IT! And if the group of conservatives here represent the vanguard of the conservatives who recognize the need for change...and the vanguard of the cosmetic change itself...they are a lost cause.

I have no doubt Foxfyre truly means well here...and a couple of the others may as well...but truly, they do not have a clue about what actually is offensive about American conservatism.
http://able2know.org/topic/113196-167#post-3562085

If whatever you are trying to build here is trying to make American conservatism "better" one of the things that I think has to be said in capital letters and in absolutely no uncertain terms is: WHATEVER THERE IS ABOUT AMERICAN CONSERVATISM AS IT NOW STANDS THAT APPEALS SO COMPLETELY AND OBSESSIVELY TO RACISTS...has got to be expunged completely, thoroughly, and forever.
http://able2know.org/topic/113196-168#post-3562719

Homophobia

In this section:
A Constitutional Amendment
Chronology of Legislation and Events
"Who and what is next?"
Alliance Defense Fund
Polls on Public Attitudes about Gay Marriage
Marriage Protection Act
An Explicit Political Agenda
Statements from the theocratic right
Updates

The late Dr. James Luther Adams, ethics professor at the Harvard Divinity school, made a powerful impression on his young student, Christopher Hedges, who went on to become a New York Times journalist and author:

Adams told us to watch closely the Christian Right's persecution of homosexuals and lesbians. Hitler, he reminded us, promised to restore moral values not long after he took power in 1933, then imposed a ban on all homosexual and lesbian organizations and publications. Then came raids on the places where homosexuals gathered, culminating on May 6, 1933, with the ransacking of the Institute for Sexual Science in Berlin. (Soldier's of Christ II, Harper's, May, 2005)

A Constitutional Amendment

Last spring the Reverend Don Wildomon, founder of the American Family Association, held a meeting with 14 leaders of the Religious Right in Arlington, Virginia. Mr. Wildmon's meeting gave birth to a concerted campaign for a constitutional amendment blocking gay marriage.

"I have never seen anything that has energized and provoked our grass roots like this issue, including Roe v. Wade," said Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, which has 16 million members. (NY Times, Feb. 8, 2004)

Cities and state legislatures have been scrambling to define their laws in respect to gay marriage. Cities from Portland and Corvallis Oregon, and San Francisco, California to New Palz, New York have been performing gay marriages.

For an interactive map of Anti-Gay Marriage Initiatives across the U.S. go to NPR

In What's Their Real Problem With Gay Marriage? (It's the Gay Part):

Their [the anti-gay marrige movement's] passion comes from their conviction that homosexuality is a sin, is immoral, harms children and spreads disease. Not only that, but they see homosexuality itself as a kind of disease, one that afflicts not only individuals but also society at large and that shares one of the prominent features of a disease: it seeks to spread itself. (New York Times, June 19, 2005)

Adam Liptak of the New York Times suggests we go back 50 years to a time when a majority of states banned interracial marriages:

Legal scholars say that an examination of the last wrenching national debate over the definition of marriage - when, only 50 years ago, a majority of states banned interracial marriages - demonstrates that the president misunderstood the legal terrain.

"No state has ever been required by the full faith and credit clause to recognize any marriage they didn't want to," said Andrew Koppelman, a law professor at Northwestern University and the author of "The Gay Rights Question in Contemporary American Law."

Indeed, until the Supreme Court struck down all laws banning interracial marriage in 1967, the nation lived with a patchwork of laws on the question. Those states that found interracial marriages offensive to their public policies were not required to recognize such marriages performed elsewhere, though sometimes they did, but as a matter of choice rather than constitutional compulsion. That experience is instructive, legal scholars say, about what is likely to happen when Massachusetts starts performing gay marriages in May.

Attorney General Eliot L. Spitzer of New York has provided an example of what the analogous patchwork in the gay marriage context might look like. Mr. Spitzer, in an informal advisory opinion issued on March 3, said he expected New York to recognize gay marriages from other states because they are not "abhorrent to New York's public policy." Thirty-eight other states, on the other hand, in enacting Defense of Marriage Acts, have expressed the view that such marriages do offend their public policies.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX): "We are pushing a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage."

Quote:

Is DeLay a MAC? LOL

"In a bid to attract new recruits, raise gobs of money and polarize American politics, Religious Right leaders from an array of groups have launched a major crusade to add an amendment to the U.S. Constitution limiting marriage to one man and one woman." more

Just before the Senate adjourned for Thanksgiving, three senators introduced what would be the first constitutional amendment in the nation's history to require discrimination and to restrict the civil rights of a targeted group of people. The Federal Marriage Amendment would prevent any state from extending equal marriage rights to same-sex couples and would possibly invalidate domestic partner and civil union laws that provide some legal protections to same-sex couples and their families. more

To read a Chronology of anti-gay legislation and events, click here.

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS
Romney Pushes Traditional Marriage in South Carolina Speech

Friday, February 23, 2007


GREENVILLE, S.C. " Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said Thursday that traditional marriage is essential for education in the U.S. to improve, and he recited a schoolyard ditty to underscore his point to gathering of Republican women.

"First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes the baby in the baby carriage," the presidential hopeful told a crowd of about 175 people gathered at a private club.

He said student success is closely tied to married couples getting involved in their children's education.

"Every child in America deserves a mom and a dad," Romney said. "We've got to have marriage before we have babies if we're going to have parental involvement in our schools."

Romney also told the crowd that he favors the establishment of charter schools and a system of increased pay for some teachers. "It's time for teaching to be recognized as the profession it is. This is not making widgets," he said.

Education and family play well in South Carolina, which will hold the first primary in the South in less than a year.

Romney has to appeal to conservative Christians here, and some of them have questioned whether his Mormon faith adheres to fundamental Christian values. The self-described religious right here accounted for a third of the GOP presidential primary in 2000.

Gay Marriage Amendment Getting a Presidential Push

By Maura Reynolds and Janet Hook
June 03, 2006 in print edition A-5

The campaign against gay marriage is scheduled to get the full White House treatment on Monday " words from President Bush in front of assembled VIPs and a bank of television cameras.

Such a carefully staged production aims to confer the grandeur of the office on the push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. But even before administration officials announced the event, some invitees denounced it as a sham.