Political Demographic split of CE&P

[Kulindahr]

But coward Bush isn't a conservative, he's a reactionary authoritarian who deserted (having walked off the field of battle in time of war), and he spent the nation dry with his insane wars and tax cuts for the hyper-wealthy. AFAIK, that's not classic conservatism. Maybe you need a "wingnut extremist" option, which I suspect, if posters here were honest (HA HA!!!), would be the dominant stripe. And while many of the so-called "conservatives" around here tropt out their bone fides of "fiscal conservative," neither their political choices nor their political views support that claim. I mean, they an "claim" to be conservative, but they can also "claim" to be Mary Poppins -- claiming doesn't make it true. Indeed, I would consider myself "conservative" because I favor a balanced budget and ruthlessly disciplined spending.

But Alfie, if you're looking at who they vote for as the evidence, well, you're condemning your own views -- they're doing just exactly what you say we all should do: vote for the candidate closest to what we want, otherwise we "waste our vote".

Do you really expect people who believe in private property and small government to vote Democrat? or people who believe in personal responsibility and self-defense to vote Democrat? Well, gee, since the only major [STRIKE]disaster[/STRIKE] party with views near those are the Republicans, by your rules that's where they should vote!

Fortunately there are some people here -- many who have refused to vote in this slanted poll -- who vote by principle and not by political convenience. If all America did that, my guess is that after the next election, neither the Democrats or the Republicans would have a majority in Congress, and we'd see the fallacies of the "liberal" and "conservative" labels start to show more and more.
Then maybe we could get some actual liberals (classical) and conservatives (properly speaking) -- and find out that the two are not opposed.

 

[Centexfarmer]

^ More than anything else your analysis illustrates how the two extremes of Liberal and Conservative don't properly serve the electorate.

Regardless of which of the two parties one finds themselves affiliated with.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yes, and if pigs had wings, there'd be pork in the trees by morning.

No, all the pork's in those little add-ons to bills that the Democrats and Republicans still do in spite of the Democrats' so-called "reform".

They limit free speech and call it "reform", for others, but they paste a list of feel-good rules that change nothing and call it "reform" for themselves.

 

[NickCole]

r u really suggesting ur conservative?

really?

There are a couple of people here who know I'm essentially conservative because they actually read the meaning of what I write rather than grinding my words through a currently fashionable propaganda mill.

People who digest propaganda and believe it's information are so startled by authenticity they don't know what to make of it so --as they do in accepting propaganda-- they go for the easiest and most superficial interpretation: I criticize BushRepublicans; BushRepublicans say they're conservative and that liberals are bad; so I must be a liberal. That's just stupid. But the Rove Machine has you by your balls and you kinda like it because it does your thinking for you - all you have to do is defend the people it tells you to defend and hate the people it tells you to hate.

The truth is BushRepublicans are not conservative.

I have a lot of respect for liberal thinking, we need it, and I believe liberals and conservatives working together can oftentimes come up with the best responses to problems government is presented - which is why I support respectful partisanship. But while I see the usefulness of liberal thinking, and applaud and support it, my own approach has become increasingly conservative.

My being conservative leads me to support:

Smaller government - BushRepublicans have bloated government beyond anything any liberal ever envisioned. Bill Clinton & Al Gore diminished the size of government.

Balanced budget - BushRepublicans have spent in deficit more than Democrats ever did and more than doubled the national debt. There isn't a conservative -a real conservative, not the faux conservatives Republicans are today- who spends money that way.

Environmment - BushRepublicans have relaxed regulations, which is fine but they didn't replace them with anything when it became clear that corporations are not protecting the environment. A conservative wants to conserve the environment, not destroy it. I don't like government regulation but a true conservative, one who's conservative on principle, doesn't blindly remove regulations, recognize that businesses are fouling and wasting our water, and do nothing about it.

Schooling - Vouchers are not a conservative response to public school failures, they're actually a liberal approach. A conservative response to the problem with our public school system would be to strip away the bells and whistles of public schools, hire more teachers and diminish class size.

Health care - although government involvement in health care is not a conservative approach (and the BushRepublican prescription drug benefit is just more proof they're not conservative), we have a huge mess growing that has to be addressed. A nation as rich and advanced as the United States cannot let our middle class citizens deterioriate into sickness because they can't afford proper health care, and the current system is headed to disaster. I'm very unhappy with the idea of government controlled health care but I've seen no other ideas put forth to deal with the problem. A conservative deals with problems forthrightly.

Social issues - conservative principles support abortion choice, gay marriage and legalizing marijuana. A conservative stays out of people's private lives and private choices. A conservative never would have interferred in the Terry Schiavo situation.

War - a genuine conservative resists entering a war but will go if absolutely necessary; BushRepublicans are eager to start wars but don't actually go themselves.

and for ur info, Karl Rove is gonzo

And what does that mean? Does it mean you don't support his tactics?

He's been leading the Republican campaign machine for many years and none of you guys complained as long as it won you elections.

That's being unprincipled.

gone

You sure are.

 

[Kulindahr]

^

 

[Sausy]

Nick,I don't necessarily agree with the entirety of your post but have never seen you in any other occasion act in an unprincipled or deliberately hurtful manner.I think you do make a very good case on the balance for your self-designation as a conservative,and I do apologize for first,even in a joking way,questioning it.I certainly think the Bush Republican pseudo-conservatism,and their marriage of convenience to the odious religious right and the increasingly arrogant and at the very least misguided neoconservative movement has been a disaster. I have been very critical on more than a few occasions on the matter and I do deeply regret my vote for Bush in 2000 and 2004.I don't see myself making that horrible misjudgement again in 2008 for another Republican,and I have srtrongly voiced my displeasure with Giuliani and Romney,who I know are more conservative kiss-up frauds than real believers in movement conservatism,which would be bad enough.We have some disasgreements Nick,but with the exception of abortion we are a lot closer than apart.

 

[star-warrior]

Me thinks Davis.

Lol. I would've chosen the lady in the wheelchair spinning around and around helplessly as the Bette Davis socialised healthcare propaganda he relies upon laughs at him from the hallway.

 

[RandomAccess]

Lol. I would've chosen the lady in the wheelchair spinning around and around helplessly as the Bette Davis socialised healthcare propaganda he relies upon laughs at him from the hallway.

That'd be Joan ". . .wire hanger. . ." Crawford. She was wonderfull. . .

And I have to agree with Centex. . . Alfie'd take great delight in leaving a rat on Chance1's food tray!

 

[lancelva]

She is opposed to capitalism; she favors what used to be called "industrial policy", i.e. setting a goal and deciding which industries are to be encouraged to flourish and which to fail in pursuit of that. Rather than organize the economy around the idea of free choice, or even prosperity, she's suggested it be organized around "climate change."

First of all, the definition you provided is not "industrial policy." Industrial policy is using economic mechanisms (tariffs, trade restrictions, etc.) to prevent a competing state from flooding your own state with imports which sell below market prices, which would otherwise give that competing state a competitive advantage over domestic goods in your state. It's what every nation does.

What you defined is an element of the Developmental State economic theory, which advocates selective protectionism--that is, the state encourages the growth of certain businesses in certain sectors while intentionally denying others in the same sector to grow, eventually forcing them out of the economy. It's what Japan and the "Asian tigers" did.

Capitalism--which is the economic form of classical liberalism--is no longer the Adam Smith laissez faire economic system that people once thought existed. As John Maynard Keynes told us, if the markets are left to their own devices they will wax and wane--that is, they will experience a series of "booms" and "busts." Since Smith's "invisible hand" that controls the market is not always gentle, the state must impose some mechanisms to protect consumers and some businesses. We saw the failure of the "hands-off" approach in Herbert Hoover's response (or lack thereof) to the Great Depression.

Anyone who has studied Economics can tell you that there are numerous notions of capitalism in the United States. Adam Smith wrote of "freedom of enterprise" which means that anyone can enter the market and compete. Today, we are moving instead toward "free enterprise" which means that businesses are free to do whatever they can to maximize profits--this is also called "corporate capitalism." Corporate capitalism, as we have seen, has failed. It includes tax breaks for big businesses, limiting right-to-strike laws, weakening SEC standards on businesses, etc. In other words, it includes limiting any control over market forces. So while corporate profits are breaking records and CEOs' incomes have increased some 400%, their employees are having a hard time making ends meet. And these employees are also the consumers. So when the consumers are struggling, they are unable to put money back into the economy. An economy cannot grow when the consumers are unable to put money back into it. So that's why this "free market" approach you keep advancing makes no economic sense.

 

[star-warrior]

That'd be Joan ". . .wire hanger. . ." Crawford. She was wonderfull. . .

And I have to agree with Centex. . . Alfie'd take great delight in leaving a rat on Chance1's food tray!

You could sneak it in...

 

[chance1]

There are a couple of people here who know I'm essentially conservative because they actually read the meaning of what I write rather than grinding my words through a currently fashionable propaganda mill.

People who digest propaganda and believe it's information are so startled by authenticity they don't know what to make of it so --as they do in accepting propaganda-- they go for the easiest and most superficial interpretation: I criticize BushRepublicans; BushRepublicans say they're conservative and that liberals are bad; so I must be a liberal. That's just stupid. But the Rove Machine has you by your balls and you kinda like it because it does your thinking for you - all you have to do is defend the people it tells you to defend and hate the people it tells you to hate.

The truth is BushRepublicans are not conservative.

I have a lot of respect for liberal thinking, we need it, and I believe liberals and conservatives working together can oftentimes come up with the best responses to problems government is presented - which is why I support respectful partisanship. But while I see the usefulness of liberal thinking, and applaud and support it, my own approach has become increasingly conservative.

My being conservative leads me to support:

Smaller government - BushRepublicans have bloated government beyond anything any liberal ever envisioned. Bill Clinton & Al Gore diminished the size of government.

Balanced budget - BushRepublicans have spent in deficit more than Democrats ever did and more than doubled the national debt. There isn't a conservative -a real conservative, not the faux conservatives Republicans are today- who spends money that way.

Environmment - BushRepublicans have relaxed regulations, which is fine but they didn't replace them with anything when it became clear that corporations are not protecting the environment. A conservative wants to conserve the environment, not destroy it. I don't like government regulation but a true conservative, one who's conservative on principle, doesn't blindly remove regulations, recognize that businesses are fouling and wasting our water, and do nothing about it.

Schooling - Vouchers are not a conservative response to public school failures, they're actually a liberal approach. A conservative response to the problem with our public school system would be to strip away the bells and whistles of public schools, hire more teachers and diminish class size.

Health care - although government involvement in health care is not a conservative approach (and the BushRepublican prescription drug benefit is just more proof they're not conservative), we have a huge mess growing that has to be addressed. A nation as rich and advanced as the United States cannot let our middle class citizens deterioriate into sickness because they can't afford proper health care, and the current system is headed to disaster. I'm very unhappy with the idea of government controlled health care but I've seen no other ideas put forth to deal with the problem. A conservative deals with problems forthrightly.

Social issues - conservative principles support abortion choice, gay marriage and legalizing marijuana. A conservative stays out of people's private lives and private choices. A conservative never would have interferred in the Terry Schiavo situation.

War - a genuine conservative resists entering a war but will go if absolutely necessary; BushRepublicans are eager to start wars but don't actually go themselves.






And what does that mean? Does it mean you don't support his tactics?

He's been leading the Republican campaign machine for many years and none of you guys complained as long as it won you elections.

That's being unprincipled.





You sure are.

"actually read?" - how does that work ????? show me

there u go again with BushRepublicans - u work it into every post - who brought up Bush here? YOU - and u spew about "propaganda" - when u r propaganda with ur made up words

I have no use for Karl Rove - do u? - now u have the "Rove Machine?" - u just make this shit up - he's gone and ur still talking about him - Ronald Reagan is dead and ur faux NY er is still talking about him - u guys should live in the living - might be good for ya - course it would give u less to crow about

ur conservative? haha

love that

now ur talking about liberals (u have respect for them aka urself) and conservatives working together - haven't read a single post of urs that wasn't divisive - r u doing the "do as i say not as i do" thingy?

and i think u have most conservative/liberal positions mixed up in ur synopsis - pretty mixed up

I guess u have created a new definition for conservatives

to suit ur principles

that's aggressive

I like it