conservative are Republicans

[Quantum Windbag]

Let me see if I can crack the nut of this thread.

The OP contends that when Conservatives (an ideological group) votes, their votes tend to go to the Republican candidate most of the time if not always. Therefore, Conservatives are Republican by their voting record. But, not every Republican is Conservative enough to satisfy the hard core Conservatives who are now trying to co-opt the power base of the Republican Party.

In the coming election in 2012, Conservatives will vote for the Republican candidate only because that candidate will NOT be Barack Obama. Even if the Republican candidate does not pass muster with the extreme Conservatives, he (or she) will get that Conservative vote. Therefore, the Republican candidate, if victorious, will have to pander to the Conservative wing of the Republican Party and the fringe Conservatives, be they Tea Party, Libertarians, Secessionists or whatever.

My contention is: too many people have the ideology of Conservatism and the political identity of Republican so interlocked in their minds that any rational discussion is impossible. Further, the Conservatives will hang tough in their ideological bent to cripple any Republican elected official, thus further poisoning and polarizing the politics of this country.

Compromise is the lost art. The constitution is a study in compromise and I find it ironic that the Conservatives, who wrap themselves in the Constitution like an aegis, can't grasp that simple fact.

I tend to agree with most of what you said, except where you argue that conservatives are hurting the Republican party. It seems to me that they do no more damage to the Republicans that the radical left does to the Democrats. The extremes keep the party focused on what should be their core values by holding them to account when they say one thing and do another. After all is said and done compromise is not about always going to the left.

I think there's not a whit of difference in degree of harm extremists do to their respective parties. I do find it ironic that many board Conservatives see the extremists in the Democrat party as "Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Fascist" (a smörgåsbord of every derogatory political term they've ever heard and completely without intellectual merit) and the extremists in the Republican party as patriots/spawn of the Founding Fathers/Heroes.

And, believe it or not, compromise IS ALWAYS about going to the Left. Without the momentum of the Left, America would not have Civil Rights protections, child labor laws. environmental protections, equal pay for equal work protections, worker safety safeguards, Social Security protection for our senior citizens, fair housing legislation, food and drug safety regulations and other social safety nets that make life tolerable in modern America.

Except for the fact that the left opposed civil rights in their present form I would agree with you, just something you might want to consider before you try to lay all the blame on the other side.

 

[Two Thumbs]

All I'm saying is that...

You can call yourself anything you want, and that is up to you. However, when you step up to the plate and you put on the Republican uniform and you vote Republican, wether you are a liberal or a consrvative or a moderate you are called a Republican.

If you vote for a Republican as mayor, an Independent for city council, and a Democrat as governor does that make you a schizophrenic?

No, it just means you need better aim with your darts.

 

[Nosmo King]

I tend to agree with most of what you said, except where you argue that conservatives are hurting the Republican party. It seems to me that they do no more damage to the Republicans that the radical left does to the Democrats. The extremes keep the party focused on what should be their core values by holding them to account when they say one thing and do another. After all is said and done compromise is not about always going to the left.

I think there's not a whit of difference in degree of harm extremists do to their respective parties. I do find it ironic that many board Conservatives see the extremists in the Democrat party as "Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Fascist" (a smörgåsbord of every derogatory political term they've ever heard and completely without intellectual merit) and the extremists in the Republican party as patriots/spawn of the Founding Fathers/Heroes.

And, believe it or not, compromise IS ALWAYS about going to the Left. Without the momentum of the Left, America would not have Civil Rights protections, child labor laws. environmental protections, equal pay for equal work protections, worker safety safeguards, Social Security protection for our senior citizens, fair housing legislation, food and drug safety regulations and other social safety nets that make life tolerable in modern America.

Except for the fact that the left opposed civil rights in their present form I would agree with you, just something you might want to consider before you try to lay all the blame on the other side.

The "Left" or southern "Democrats", who were anything but "Leftists"?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Let me see if I can crack the nut of this thread.

The OP contends that when Conservatives (an ideological group) votes, their votes tend to go to the Republican candidate most of the time if not always. Therefore, Conservatives are Republican by their voting record. But, not every Republican is Conservative enough to satisfy the hard core Conservatives who are now trying to co-opt the power base of the Republican Party.

In the coming election in 2012, Conservatives will vote for the Republican candidate only because that candidate will NOT be Barack Obama. Even if the Republican candidate does not pass muster with the extreme Conservatives, he (or she) will get that Conservative vote. Therefore, the Republican candidate, if victorious, will have to pander to the Conservative wing of the Republican Party and the fringe Conservatives, be they Tea Party, Libertarians, Secessionists or whatever.

My contention is: too many people have the ideology of Conservatism and the political identity of Republican so interlocked in their minds that any rational discussion is impossible. Further, the Conservatives will hang tough in their ideological bent to cripple any Republican elected official, thus further poisoning and polarizing the politics of this country.

Compromise is the lost art. The constitution is a study in compromise and I find it ironic that the Conservatives, who wrap themselves in the Constitution like an aegis, can't grasp that simple fact.

I tend to agree with most of what you said, except where you argue that conservatives are hurting the Republican party. It seems to me that they do no more damage to the Republicans that the radical left does to the Democrats. The extremes keep the party focused on what should be their core values by holding them to account when they say one thing and do another. After all is said and done compromise is not about always going to the left.

I think there's not a whit of difference in degree of harm extremists do to their respective parties. I do find it ironic that many board Conservatives see the extremists in the Democrat party as "Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Fascist" (a smörgåsbord of every derogatory political term they've ever heard and completely without intellectual merit) and the extremists in the Republican party as patriots/spawn of the Founding Fathers/Heroes.

And, believe it or not, compromise IS ALWAYS about going to the Left. Without the momentum of the Left, America would not have Civil Rights protections, child labor laws. environmental protections, equal pay for equal work protections, worker safety safeguards, Social Security protection for our senior citizens, fair housing legislation, food and drug safety regulations and other social safety nets that make life tolerable in modern America.

Actually socialist is not out of the realm of reasonable.

I think it was in the mid to late 60's when the last Socialist ran for Pres. One of his speeches he stated he didn't need to run again as the DNC had adopted the socialist party [of the time] platform.

However, would be tyrants walk on both sides in all parties. It's why I can't tolerate social conservatives in politics.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think there's not a whit of difference in degree of harm extremists do to their respective parties. I do find it ironic that many board Conservatives see the extremists in the Democrat party as "Marxist/Socialist/Communist/Fascist" (a smörgåsbord of every derogatory political term they've ever heard and completely without intellectual merit) and the extremists in the Republican party as patriots/spawn of the Founding Fathers/Heroes.

And, believe it or not, compromise IS ALWAYS about going to the Left. Without the momentum of the Left, America would not have Civil Rights protections, child labor laws. environmental protections, equal pay for equal work protections, worker safety safeguards, Social Security protection for our senior citizens, fair housing legislation, food and drug safety regulations and other social safety nets that make life tolerable in modern America.

Except for the fact that the left opposed civil rights in their present form I would agree with you, just something you might want to consider before you try to lay all the blame on the other side.

The "Left" or southern "Democrats", who were anything but "Leftists"?

Go back a little further in history. The Democrats stacked the court right after the Civil War and got a ruling that the 14th Amendment did not apply to the states, invalidating the first major civil rights law in our country's history. You cannot blame the "Separate but Equal" doctrine on the right.

 

[Nosmo King]

Except for the fact that the left opposed civil rights in their present form I would agree with you, just something you might want to consider before you try to lay all the blame on the other side.

The "Left" or southern "Democrats", who were anything but "Leftists"?

Go back a little further in history. The Democrats stacked the court right after the Civil War and got a ruling that the 14th Amendment did not apply to the states, invalidating the first major civil rights law in our country's history. You cannot blame the "Separate but Equal" doctrine on the right.

Again, the "Left" or southern Democrats? Was it the "Left" that pushed for food and drug regulations, 'busted' trusts and started a federal bureaucracy known as the National Parks Service or was it a Progressive Republican known as Theodore Roosevelt?

There's a difference between the national parties; Republican and Democrat and political ideologies "Left" and "Right".

One does not always validate the other.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The "Left" or southern "Democrats", who were anything but "Leftists"?

Go back a little further in history. The Democrats stacked the court right after the Civil War and got a ruling that the 14th Amendment did not apply to the states, invalidating the first major civil rights law in our country's history. You cannot blame the "Separate but Equal" doctrine on the right.

Again, the "Left" or southern Democrats? Was it the "Left" that pushed for food and drug regulations, 'busted' trusts and started a federal bureaucracy known as the National Parks Service or was it a Progressive Republican known as Theodore Roosevelt?

There's a difference between the national parties; Republican and Democrat and political ideologies "Left" and "Right".

One does not always validate the other.

What power did Southern Anything have right after the Civil War? The North is the one that pushed the reforms to the Supreme Court through because it allowed the carpetbaggers to have more power over the south. As usual, it all comes back to money.

The left has pushed for the end of "urban blight" and the use of eminent domain to take property from poor people of color and give it to rich, white developers. It is the right that is fighting that. Do not try to get up on a moral high horse about the superiority of the left and why compromise is the best thing for everyone.

Compromise led to slavery being legal in this country in the first place. It was the extremists who refused to accept compromise that ended it, just like they did in every other country. Extremists who refused to compromise ended the Jim Crow laws. Extremists who refused to compromise ended the British rule of India. (Yes, Ghandi was an extremist, just ask the people that he drove away by forcing the entire world to see the British Empire for what it really was.) A young (8 years old) extremist named Aisha recently demanded a divorce from from her husband in Suadi Arabie, and extremists across the world rose up to cheer her on.

Imagine the world we would live in if everyone compromised. The only people that would like that would would be the aristocrats who ruled it, because everyone else would compromise themselves out of any rights.

Fuck compromise, embrace extremism.