AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

How do you think our country got to this point? Some idiots voted for dunce Bush for two terms. We had all the evidence we needed to change course in 2004, but failed to do that. The supreme court made the choice for us.

So its ok to blame the administration, if you dont like them?
Isnt that being a little hypocritical on your part?

Yeah, Williams ends his discourse with "how would you like it if congress ran our supermarkets?" What am I missing?

See? Not a clue what Williams was talking about but he beats the same tired old mantra that it's all Bush's fault instead of seeing the 'solution' that Williams offered.

Williams offered a solution? I completely missed it.

No ****!

There's a difference between a government that destroys our lives, and a government that tries to benefit its citizens. Bush was a destroyer, and he was responsible for the Iraq war that is still being fought after he was unable to have an exit strategy before he started it; something he failed to do, and its now costing us ten billion every month and all the unnecessary lives lost - both innocent Iraqis and our military men, women and equipment.

At least Obama is trying to help Americans at a time when the world economy is in crisis. Guess who brought us to this point? Can you guess?

There's a time to blame government, and there's a time when the government can benefit its citizens. The incompetence of Bush is legend.

There there C.I. I understand that you want Obama to run your supermarket. It's okay. The way things are going, you may even get your wish.

Robert posted this video on another thread and, though it is excellent, it isn't generating a lot of attention there. I moved a link here so it wouldn't be lost.

Obviously the cause of the current credit freeze that is the basis of our current recession was the work of the brokers and bankers/financial institutions who took advantage of lax rules in who would receive loans for houses.

The lax rules that allowed it to happen were the work of the federal government that sets the interest rates on the money and the rules/regulations for the banks/financial institutions. The government also has the power to encourage the brokers/banks/financial institutions to lend to lend to people with little or no ability to repay their loans and to threaten the lend institutions with retaliation if they don't do that.

As the seeds were first sown well before, it will be really difficult to lay all that at the feet of the Bush administration and GOP Congress though they share culpability in not putting a stop to risky practices when they had a chance. Once the Democrats took over in Congress and exacerbated the problem, the President was powerless to do anything to stop it.

So here we are. This takes a little time to watch, but it is well worth the trouble:

I like this thread. It's fun to read along, even though it should be titled "the history falsification thread"....

Well when you care to present evidence that history posted here is flawed, we would be delighted to see it. I suggest that you critique Blatham's, C.I.'s, Advocate's, your posts and a few others for starters.

Hi oe, Glad someone "out there" sees the ridiculous interpretation of our country's political history by the MACs. Not only do they not understand that their definition doesn't mean anything, but try to apply their "understanding" of politics based on their mis-interpretation of history. They have the audacity to tell me my reading of their posts are wrong.

Foxie even tries to imply I want Obama to run our supermarkets. With that kind of idiocy, it's a waste of time trying to discuss anything.

In rapid succession, amidst several rants on how George Bush (presumably single handedly) destroyed the country, C.I. said


(Note: calling attention to the "Blaming the government gets us nowhere" line amidst those rants in which he blamed the government. . . .)

and


and


and


To which I replied


Which he hasn’t rebutted. And if he doesn’t want Obama running the supermarkets, I wonder if there is anything else he doesn’t want the government running? Which was Williams point. Which C.I. missed entirely.

You're the one who "suggested" the idea of Obama running the supermarkets.

As for one seems like conflicts in my posts, it's because you don't see the "consistencies" in them. Bush was a big failure as president, and he's the one that created the current mess. That our government screws up, as in Bush's eight years in office, doesn't change that fact. He was in charge of all of the government departments; the buck stops at Bush's desk. That the conservatives and supreme court made him president for the second term tells us conservatives have no brain. You are masochists; you must all love pain. You now want Obama to correct the mess created by Bush, and most of you expect miracles for the mending to being now - and Obama has been in office for only one month. Bush has been in office for eight years. There's a thing called common sense missing from your brain. It was not the last two years of the democratic majority in congress when the republicans filibuster stopped most legislation. That was also evident in the stimulus plan; it was strictly based on party line passing the legislation.

Blaming the government will get you nowhere now; you must give Obama the chance to improve the economic conditions that's in crisis mode; all created by Bush and company. Conservatives hate regulations, and that's what we got; incompetence.

And your ignorant supermarket quip only shows your inability to see that Obama is not trying to control commerce. Just plain stupid.

CI, all I can say is that you've proved once again that you don't even read what YOU write much less what anybody else writes before you type out your nonsense. But it's okay. I'm used to that now.

That's okay Foxie, you've been proven wrong and contradict yourself so often, you are legend on a2k.

The funny thing is, it's only you who seems to miss what I post; nobody else except ican and okie seems to think as you do.

And just think, all that flatulence came from Cicerone Imposter without a link.

Does he really think we believe anything he says. Foxfyre is at least fifty times better informedthan Cicerone Imposter because she posts evidence.

Thank you,Foxfyre!

Old Europe apparently does not read the papers>

First, a defintion of the word --exacerbated-A good word used by Foxfyre--

TO INCREASE THE SEVERITY.

Old Europe is probably not aware that the stock market flirted with a twelve year low. If Old Europe reads the papers at the end of next week, he will probably discover that the horrendous political decisions being made by Obama is indeed causing money to fly out of the market since THE MARKET DOES NOT LIKE UNCERTAINTY.

We are replicating the mess made by FDR.He said he would take the nation out of the depression. He taxed the wealthy heavily with his "Excess Profits Tax". He caused a shortage of investment capital available with all of his CCC, AAA. NRA, WPA, nonsense which only provided jobs for short periods of time and did almost nothing to get the country out of the depression.

If you don't know that Obama is leading us down that same destructive path, Old Europe., you should do some reading!( Not Karl Marx--although no one reads him anymore except in Berkeley)

Cicerone Imposter, who,I am certain never reads anything more taxing than comic books, does not really know about the Supreme Court which "made the decision for us". I am sure that Cicerone Imposter, like many others, actually thinks that the Supreme Court vote was close after the 2000 election. He is wrong.-AS USUAL>

quote--"Breaking the Deadlock"p. 10--By Judge Richard A,Posner

"Actually, seven justices, not five, had agreed tha tthe recount ordered by the Florida court was so standardless as to deny Florida's votes the equal protection of the laws,in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution."

But, Cicerone Imposter does not know this. I wonder if Cicerone Imposter knows that the Supreme Court adjudicates difficult legal questions which,many times, sets the pattern for future legislation.

I personally do not agree with Roe vs. Wade, but I HONOR the decree of the court. When I read the garbage laid down by Cicerone Imposter on these threads, I do sometimes wish that the Supreme Court had not found cause to rebut the great Oliver Wendell Holmes who in Buck vs.Bell said "Three Generations of Imbeciles are enough" and then we would not have to put up with Cicerone Imposter..But,alas, Buck vs.Bell was invalidated and because o that, because I respect the Supreme Court as the arbitrer of the law, we must put up with Cicerone Imposter.

If only Cicerone would honor the findings of the Supreme Court as well!

Fox,
Yes, my ruminations in that post were an attempt to find some solutions to the problem of voter/citizen education by thinking out loud, as it were. That effort would be focused on both Republican libertarian principles and reasons that effect belief. The difference between Progressives and MAC’s seems that the latter look to reason and data to form and support belief whereas Progressives form a cherished belief and then must encourage the belief in the belief since history, data, and reason do not support the belief itself. We have seen this many times before. The belief is so important, so longed for, such a part of our being, so invested in, that it simply must be true. Also, we become so dependent on the belief that we then invent authorities to so console, but, whether they be priest, senator, or chosen community organizers they always disappoint. We then, again, proceed to seek our salvation or sustenance from another false prophet.

Ican would say that all this government spending is just plain treason. Radical? Perhaps, but he has taken the time to back up such thoughts and I, for one, find them compelling. If we could call his commentary ridiculous or far fetched it would only be for hoping that, given recent events, he thinks anybody cares that the country is going to hell in a hand basket. I care. I wonder what our founding fathers would call all this government spending and coddling, High Treason? Perhaps they, additionally, would label it Evil. For it saps American strength and demoralizes millions (Think of all the wasted human potential with 4-5 generations of our citizens on the public dole who possess no knowledge of methods of self support). It Robs this historically great nation of the very essence that made it great; individual freedom.

But, I am rambling. Yeh, when I researched that post I came across this very definition of Classical liberalism. Given the liberals in power, wouldn’t it be wonderful if that definition applied here? That’s why I came up with the Acronym MALIB (Modified American Libertarian) but rejected it thinking it would be better describing present liberals-- the MAL representing malicious, malady, or perhaps maladjusted.
That quote does seem Churchillian given his description of Russia, you know, the riddle, mystery, enigma thing. You gotta love such quotes that elegantly distill observed truths.

JM