AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

I wasn't speaking about the German definitions.

I was referring to the article by Sullivan (British citizen) in the Sunday Times (British weekly newspaper). And to ...

Never mind.

And again, what difference does it make whether Sullivan is a British citizen or not? He was commenting on American conservatism as an 'industry'. I think that qualifies the subject matter for this thread quite handily.

I was thinking about this essay posted two days ago by Foxfyre:

Quote:

Honduras' non-coup
Under the country's Constitution, the ouster of President Manuel Zelaya was legal.
By Miguel A. Estrada
July 10, 2009

Honduras, the tiny Central American nation, had a change of leaders on June 28. The country's military arrested President Manuel Zelaya -- in his pajamas, he says -- and put him on a plane bound for Costa Rica. A new president, Roberto Micheletti, was appointed. Led by Cuba and Venezuela (Sudan and North Korea were not immediately available), the international community swiftly condemned this "coup."

Something clearly has gone awry with the rule of law in Honduras -- but it is not necessarily what you think. Begin with Zelaya's arrest. The Supreme Court of Honduras, as it turns out, had ordered the military to arrest Zelaya two days earlier. A second order (issued on the same day) authorized the military to enter Zelaya's home to execute the arrest. These orders were issued at the urgent request of the country's attorney general. All the relevant legal documents can be accessed (in Spanish) on the Supreme Court's website. They make for interesting reading.

Although the Honduran Supreme Court played a leading role, the ouster of the elected president was still a coup. The new president's government does not have any legitimacy.

Please explain your rationale for why the new president's government does not have any legitimacy. It seems that the new president's government is the same government as the old government. All that happened in Honduras is that those within the government enforced their own law by preventing an illegal referendum. That I don't think is really within the definition of a 'coup'.

It isn't much difference from the petition to the Illinois Supreme Court ordering Governor Blogojevich to be removed from his office. The Illinois Court, however, refused to do it so he stayed in office until he was impeached and thrown out. If he was doing something imminently harmful to the state, I believe the court could have ordered him removed, however. The Honduras court did.

Ican wrote:

Obama lives in the intellectual, emotional, and political corral once described by Einstein: "People who keep repeating the same action and each time expecting a different result are insane."

You liberal/democrat pseudo intellectuals certainly have an over inflated
feeling of self worth... you are all very cute like a basket full of kittens.

H2O MAN wrote:

You liberal/democrat pseudo intellectuals certainly have an over inflated
feeling of self worth... you are all very cute like a basket full of kittens.

No, they simply consider themselves morally and intellectually superior to those of us who don't share their often tunnel-visioned view of the world however incapable they might be of defining a conviction or making any kind of coherent argument against an opposing point of view. So, they insult people, ideologies, concepts, principles, ideas even as they have nothing coherent to offer in rebuttal.

No, they simply consider themselves morally and intellectually superior to those of us who don't share their often tunnel-visioned view of the world however incapable they might be of defining a conviction or making any kind of coherent argument against an opposing point of view. So, they insult people, ideologies, concepts, principles, ideas even as they have nothing coherent to offer in rebuttal.

Quote:

No, they simply consider themselves morally and intellectually superior to those of us who don't share their often tunnel-visioned view of the world however incapable they might be of defining a conviction or making any kind of coherent argument against an opposing point of view. So, they insult people, ideologies, concepts, principles, ideas even as they have nothing coherent to offer in rebuttal.

One out of three sentences/ideas pointed out the blatant hypocrisy of conservatives. This one you called an insult, which I guess it is if you were insulted. Sometimes the truth is painful.

The other two raised specific issues, which specifically challenged your POVs on this rather related subject. So what did you proceed with, Foxy but he very thing you chastize others for.

I'm quite sure that you'll now be insulted to hear that you are a hypocrite or maybe you'll simply go to default "stick your fingers in your ears and hum loudly" routine that is second nature to conservatives.