Conservative and Conservation

[Mr Natural]

Silly, baiting question. Not worthy of an answer.....other than the answer of "that is a silly baiting question and not worthy of an answer"

So in other words, you can't answer the silly, baiting question.

Actually, I know YOU can for it is plain and simple and I will not you play your silly little baiting games with me....as you do with other people.

Now, if you would like to treat your being so transparent as an issue that I have....so be it.

But I will not set you up to take my answer, spin it, and respond so you can have your childish fun.

Sorry bro. Not into it.

The phrase "the way it was" (your words) implies that "it" was better at some point in the past.

I'm just curious as to when you believe "it " was better.

Surely you can come up with an era from the past when "it" was better.

Come on, take a shot, how hard can it be?

 

[manifold]

It's quite ironic that they share the same root word.

Can anybody tell us why?

Ironic but not surprising that the democrat party uses the dumb ass as it's logo. Conservatives and pro 2nd Amendment hunters and sportsmen were promoting conservation while democrats were fouling the world with atomic testing and "better living through chemistry".

And the democrats were the original racists and klansmen.

It appears that somewhere along the way the two parties made a trade, as it were.

 

[manifold]

It's on the differences between Progressive Failures and Conservative success. That no one on the planet has a perfectly Conservative government issue.

Light out, Prog

The point was that the "conservative successes" you cited are far more progressive than the US has ever been.

No, the point was the stark contrast between 2 nations sharing real estate but one goes Progressive and the other stays more Conservative.

I could add Haiti and the Dominican Republic to the list too. One is a Progressive Hellhole (redundant, I know) where 1 million people ARE STILL LIVING IN TENTS and the other is paradise in comparison

So you don't disagree with the point that the 'conservative successes' you cited are in fact less conservative and more progressive than the United States? And therefore, we can afford to be more progressive than we have ever been and still succeed?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I disagree. My deflection knocked you clean into next week. Obviously.

But by all means, go ahead and name a few politicians whose platforms, in your opinion, conform to the dictionary definition of conservatism you cited. I dare you.

Don't flatter yourself nancy.

Conservatism is protean and there are many politicians that have conservative values, ie.

•Traditional family values and the sanctity of marriage
•A small, non-invasive government
•A strong national defense focused on protection and the fight against terrorism
•A commitment to faith and religion
•The right to life for every human being

So you can't name a single one. Exactly as I anticipated.

And furthermore, which of those bullet points stems from the definition you cited? I count exactly zero.

Keep fail'n buddy, it's always a hoot.

I didn't attempt to name any, but there are many that have conservative values.

Conservatives in the United State political scene are like any other group: they come in all varieties and they don’t think uniformly.

 

[Si modo]

It's quite ironic that they share the same root word.

Can anybody tell us why?

Ironic but not surprising that the democrat party uses the dumb ass as it's logo. Conservatives and pro 2nd Amendment hunters and sportsmen were promoting conservation while democrats were fouling the world with atomic testing and "better living through chemistry".

And the democrats were the original racists and klansmen.

It appears that somewhere along the way the two parties made a trade, as it were.

David Duke loves the OWS.

 

[manifold]

The discussion wasn't about liberals it was about conservatives.

Your deflection failed nancy.

I disagree. My deflection knocked you clean into next week. Obviously.

But by all means, go ahead and name a few politicians whose platforms, in your opinion, conform to the dictionary definition of conservatism you cited. I dare you.

Actually.....none.

That doesnt mean that there are not candidates that have more conservative values and ideas than others...but NO politician can win an election as a pure conservative.

We are a nation that is very much in the middle.

No candidate can win being 100% liberal as well......many say Obama is...I dont...hge is a liberal that is willing to compromise in an effort to get the moderate vote....

Well...conservative politicians must ALSO compromise to get the moderate vote..

But you know that already....so I dont quite understand the reason for this discussion.....

Or do you think it would be wise for a conservative candidate to JUST appeal to the conservative voter? How on earth can he/she win?

The reason for the discussion is academic exploration.

Some people are so partisan that such academic exploration is indeed not possible.

fwiw, I don't put you in that group.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I disagree. My deflection knocked you clean into next week. Obviously.

But by all means, go ahead and name a few politicians whose platforms, in your opinion, conform to the dictionary definition of conservatism you cited. I dare you.

Don't flatter yourself nancy.

....

Manifold's name is Nancy?

These are directly contradictory. The first is social conservatism, the second is constitutional conservatism.

That's in direct contrast to fiscal conservatism.

....
•A commitment to faith and religion

....

So no atheists are allowed in your idea of some sort of Conservative Club?

....
•The right to life for every human being

If that means abolishing abortion, that is in direct contrast to small government ideals and has constitutional issues.





YOUR box is YOUR box. It has little to do with a lot of folks who are labeled "Cons".

Are you implying none of those are conservative values?

Surely you jest!

 

[manifold]

So in other words, you can't answer the silly, baiting question.

Actually, I know YOU can for it is plain and simple and I will not you play your silly little baiting games with me....as you do with other people.

Now, if you would like to treat your being so transparent as an issue that I have....so be it.

But I will not set you up to take my answer, spin it, and respond so you can have your childish fun.

Sorry bro. Not into it.

The phrase "the way it was" (your words) implies that "it" was better at some point in the past.

I'm just curious as to when you believe "it " was better.

Surely you can come up with an era from the past when "it" was better.

Come on, take a shot, how hard can it be?

The Clinton years.

 

[Vaard]

It's on the differences between Progressive Failures and Conservative success. That no one on the planet has a perfectly Conservative government issue.

Light out, Prog

The point was that the "conservative successes" you cited are far more progressive than the US has ever been.

No, the point was the stark contrast between 2 nations sharing real estate but one goes Progressive and the other stays more Conservative.

I could add Haiti and the Dominican Republic to the list too. One is a Progressive Hellhole (redundant, I know) where 1 million people ARE STILL LIVING IN TENTS and the other is paradise in comparison

the problem is that you are viewing liberalism as conservative successes and blaming liberalism for conservative failures.......

its understandable since most republicans view anything they see as positive as "conservative" and anything that is a failure as "liberal" instead of facing reality ........

north korea is the very definition of conservative values of maintaining the old ways no matter what while south korea has steadily progressed forward due to its liberal views.......

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The point was that the "conservative successes" you cited are far more progressive than the US has ever been.

No, the point was the stark contrast between 2 nations sharing real estate but one goes Progressive and the other stays more Conservative.

I could add Haiti and the Dominican Republic to the list too. One is a Progressive Hellhole (redundant, I know) where 1 million people ARE STILL LIVING IN TENTS and the other is paradise in comparison

So you don't disagree with the point that the 'conservative successes' you cited are in fact less conservative and more progressive than the United States? And therefore, we can afford to be more progressive than we have ever been and still succeed?

Again, probably more irrelevant that anything else you've tried to come up with.

For the first 150 years after its founding, the USA was the most Conservative nation on the planet and became the most prosperous and power nation in record time. That's the best example of Conservative success. For the last 100 years we've been subject to a Progressive Jihad that finally taken its toll.

Again: Conservatism = Success; Progressives = Failure.

How many more ways do you need to hear it?

 

[kiwiman127]

There actually was a time when conservatives were also were strong conservationist. Then Reagan came along and hired James Watt as Secretary of Interior and things changed.
The very first GOP president, Abraham Lincoln was behind the protection of California's Yosemite Valley, Teddy Roosevelt said it was patriotic to save our natural treasures and started our National Parks, Eisenhower established the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and Nixon, signed almost every major piece of environmental legislation that came his way including the Clean Air Act.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The point was that the "conservative successes" you cited are far more progressive than the US has ever been.

No, the point was the stark contrast between 2 nations sharing real estate but one goes Progressive and the other stays more Conservative.

I could add Haiti and the Dominican Republic to the list too. One is a Progressive Hellhole (redundant, I know) where 1 million people ARE STILL LIVING IN TENTS and the other is paradise in comparison

the problem is that you are viewing liberalism as conservative successes and blaming liberalism for conservative failures.......

its understandable since most republicans view anything they see as positive as "conservative" and anything that is a failure as "liberal" instead of facing reality ........

north korea is the very definition of conservative values of maintaining the old ways no matter what while south korea has steadily progressed forward due to its liberal views.......

You're in way over your head....try the shallow end, or maybe the kiddie pool.

What you try to say is "Conservative" is just a lie to cover Progressive Totalitarianism so you're either stupid or lying, there's no third choice.

 

[manifold]

No, the point was the stark contrast between 2 nations sharing real estate but one goes Progressive and the other stays more Conservative.

I could add Haiti and the Dominican Republic to the list too. One is a Progressive Hellhole (redundant, I know) where 1 million people ARE STILL LIVING IN TENTS and the other is paradise in comparison

So you don't disagree with the point that the 'conservative successes' you cited are in fact less conservative and more progressive than the United States? And therefore, we can afford to be more progressive than we have ever been and still succeed?

Again, probably more irrelevant that anything else you've tried to come up with.

For the first 150 years after its founding, the USA was the most Conservative nation on the planet and became the most prosperous and power nation in record time. That's the best example of Conservative success. For the last 100 years we've been subject to a Progressive Jihad that finally taken its toll.

Again: Conservatism = Success; Progressives = Failure.

How many more ways do you need to hear it?

Again: What you cited as 'Conservatism' (Germany & S. Korea) are both far more progressive than the US has ever been. How many more ways do you need to hear it?

 

[Vaard]

Again, probably more irrelevant that anything else you've tried to come up with.

For the first 150 years after its founding, the USA was the most Conservative nation on the planet and became the most prosperous and power nation in record time. That's the best example of Conservative success. For the last 100 years we've been subject to a Progressive Jihad that finally taken its toll.

Again: Conservatism = Success; Progressives = Failure.

How many more ways do you need to hear it?

well, i definately agree that slavery, second class immigrants and explitation of the labor force are definately conservative values.......


in spite of those conservative leaning, liberalism of protecting the environment, not allowing children to be exploited in factories and ending slavery is what made america great.......

 

[Vaard]

if conservatives had their way, there would have been no industrial revolution, no nation wide railroad, federal highway system, no mandatory education, chinese would not be allowed to be citizens and the south would be still using slaves for their labor force......

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So you don't disagree with the point that the 'conservative successes' you cited are in fact less conservative and more progressive than the United States? And therefore, we can afford to be more progressive than we have ever been and still succeed?

Again, probably more irrelevant that anything else you've tried to come up with.

For the first 150 years after its founding, the USA was the most Conservative nation on the planet and became the most prosperous and power nation in record time. That's the best example of Conservative success. For the last 100 years we've been subject to a Progressive Jihad that finally taken its toll.

Again: Conservatism = Success; Progressives = Failure.

How many more ways do you need to hear it?

Again: What you cited as 'Conservatism' (Germany & S. Korea) are both far more progressive than the US has ever been. How many more ways do you need to hear it?

You're "point" is increasingly more irrelevant every time you fail. You see that, right?

You have to compare comparables and I've given you several side by side examples. That you fail to see the contrasts is clearly some failing on my part to explain it more clearly, bringing down to your level. I thought the map of the 2 Koreas at night might help.

You knew that was Korea right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

if conservatives had their way, there would have been no industrial revolution, no nation wide railroad, federal highway system, no mandatory education, chinese would not be allowed to be citizens and the south would be still using slaves for their labor force......

Clearly a cry for help on your part.

 

[freedombecki]

if conservatives had their way, there would have been no industrial revolution, no nation wide railroad, federal highway system, no mandatory education, chinese would not be allowed to be citizens and the south would be still using slaves for their labor force......

Please give the board a link to this assertion for its perusal. Thanks.

 

[Vaard]

You're "point" is increasingly more irrelevant every time you fail. You see that, right?

You have to compare comparables and I've given you several side by side examples. That you fail to see the contrasts is clearly some failing on my part to explain it more clearly, bringing down to your level. I thought the map of the 2 Koreas at night might help.

You knew that was Korea right?

yes, you gave comparisons, but incorrectly identified which was the conservative part ( north korea) and which was the liberal part (south korea)......

so, the example was good, you just mixed up the labels........


the fact that you refuse to accept that fact is what is making the point you are trying to make more and more ridiculous.......

 

[Vaard]

if conservatives had their way, there would have been no industrial revolution, no nation wide railroad, federal highway system, no mandatory education, chinese would not be allowed to be citizens and the south would be still using slaves for their labor force......

Clearly a cry for help on your part.

yes, and i am trying to answer your cry for help, but you refuse to accept it.......

but the fact that you realize you are crying for help is a good step forward..... you are progressing......