Conservatives out of touch with people?

[zzzz]

Gov. Daniels called for truce on social issues until we can get the economy straightened out. Sounds good to me, focus on what is really important to most Americans. But Conservatives are saying hold on, we cannot go forward without social issues having the same status as the economy. Personally I think that we ought to be focused on the economy.

Santorum hits Daniels on the 'truce' - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

 

[rightwinger]

What would happen if some gays snuck out and got married while we were working on the economy?

 

[AllieBaba]

Gov. Daniels called for truce on social issues until we can get the economy straightened out. Sounds good to me, focus on what is really important to most Americans. But Conservatives are saying hold on, we cannot go forward without social issues having the same status as the economy. Personally I think that we ought to be focused on the economy.

Santorum hits Daniels on the 'truce' - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Unfortunately, social issues have a huge impact on the economy.

Though I haven't seen any evidence that the right is failing to focus on the economy.

Perhaps the left just feels bad about the bullshit crap they push and is projecting that onto the right. For example, the putrid insistence that we continue to increase funding of spectacular social programs....like obamacare....that causes the right to address social issues.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gov. Daniels called for truce on social issues until we can get the economy straightened out. Sounds good to me, focus on what is really important to most Americans. But Conservatives are saying hold on, we cannot go forward without social issues having the same status as the economy. Personally I think that we ought to be focused on the economy.

Santorum hits Daniels on the 'truce' - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Unfortunately, social issues have a huge impact on the economy.

Though I haven't seen any evidence that the right is failing to focus on the economy.

Perhaps the left just feels bad about the bullshit crap they push and is projecting that onto the right. For example, the putrid insistence that we continue to increase funding of spectacular social programs....like obamacare....that causes the right to address social issues.

Wrong. Avarice, bigotry and callousness are the cause for the Right addressing social issues.

 

[VaYank5150]

Gov. Daniels called for truce on social issues until we can get the economy straightened out. Sounds good to me, focus on what is really important to most Americans. But Conservatives are saying hold on, we cannot go forward without social issues having the same status as the economy. Personally I think that we ought to be focused on the economy.

Santorum hits Daniels on the 'truce' - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Unfortunately, social issues have a huge impact on the economy.

Though I haven't seen any evidence that the right is failing to focus on the economy.

Perhaps the left just feels bad about the bullshit crap they push and is projecting that onto the right. For example, the putrid insistence that we continue to increase funding of spectacular social programs....like obamacare....that causes the right to address social issues.

REALLY? Where's that jobs bill the GOP promised? Or does that not fit into your definition of "working on the economy"?

 

[Foxfyre]

Well that' pretty much what President Obama suggested in the State of the Union speech. Let's call a truce on what has already been done and go forward civilly hand in hand with spending frozen at present levels. Meaning, of course, at the levels that have already done the damage and without correcting any of the problems that have generated a runaway deficit and debt.

To any conservative this is not acceptable.

I submit that the vast majority of Americans with a clue are more conservative than not--that would include most of mainstream Americans. So it's pretty hard to acknowledge that and say that conservatives are out of touch with the people since most of the people are at least somewhat conservative.

Then there is the political class who looks to the federal government to solve all of societies ills and who blame conservatives for all the ills of society.

Which is out of touch? Hmmmm.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Some social issues are tied to the economy, like welfare, obamacare, grants, loans and other programs that get money.

To say just look at the economy only and completely ignore social issues that affect the economy seems off.

but crap like gay marriage is a states issue, so it's irrelevant. working abortion, again, is a waste of time. things like that.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Before I post a reply, do we mean conservatives or republicans?

 

[midcan5]

Social issues are the great distractor for the corporate republicans. It's all they can do, their policies are only for the wealthy and the corporations and if focused on too strongly would only show them for the tools they are. Long live the unimportant, it keeps the electorate in check and often happy.

"'Practical' politics, it is held, calls for policies that appeal to the fortunate. The poor do not vote; the alert politician bids for the comfortable and the rich. This would be politically foolish for the Democratic Party; those whose primary concern is to protect their income, their capital and their business interest will always vote for the party that most strongly affirms its service to their pecuniary well-being. This is and has always been the republicans. The Democrats have no future as a low grade substitute.." John Kenneth Galbraith 'The Good Society'

 

[Foxfyre]

Social issues are the great distractor for the corporate republicans. It's all they can do, their policies are only for the wealthy and the corporations and if focused on too strongly would only show them for the tools they are. Long live the unimportant, it keeps the electorate in check and often happy.

"'Practical' politics, it is held, calls for policies that appeal to the fortunate. The poor do not vote; the alert politician bids for the comfortable and the rich. This would be politically foolish for the Democratic Party; those whose primary concern is to protect their income, their capital and their business interest will always vote for the party that most strongly affirms its service to their pecuniary well-being. This is and has always been the republicans. The Democrats have no future as a low grade substitute.." John Kenneth Galbraith 'The Good Society'

Doesn't it embarrass you to post something like you just wrote here?

 

[Claudette]

All social issues cost taxpayer dollars.

Anything that costs taxpayer dollars is tied to the economy.

 

[Foxfyre]

Some social issues are tied to the economy, like welfare, obamacare, grants, loans and other programs that get money.

To say just look at the economy only and completely ignore social issues that affect the economy seems off.

but crap like gay marriage is a states issue, so it's irrelevant. working abortion, again, is a waste of time. things like that.

ALL government issues are social issues. Everything the government does affects some part of or all of society. That includes taxing, spending, treaties, grants, regulation, policy, as well as government charity in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all the myriad number of programs specifically targeted at the poor. Every decision of government that affect business at ANY level will affect society either for better or worse. Every tax dollar taken and spent affects somebody. Every dime added to the deficit and national debt will have an impact on society.

Midcans accused conservative/Republican policy only taking care of the rich. A more realistic person might rightfully point out that you cannot attack or punish that same rich without hurting the poor.

A small but highly vocal and active segment of society wants to confiscate what the rich have on the theory that this will help the poor.

A more realistic mainstream knows that encouraging people to become rich and thereby save, invest, start, expand, and grow businesses that need people to work in them and become more prosperous, even rich, is the very best way to help the poor.

Feeling righteous by encouraging people through government policy to become or remain poor is being REALLY out of touch with most of the people.

 

[Claudette]

Gov. Daniels called for truce on social issues until we can get the economy straightened out. Sounds good to me, focus on what is really important to most Americans. But Conservatives are saying hold on, we cannot go forward without social issues having the same status as the economy. Personally I think that we ought to be focused on the economy.

Santorum hits Daniels on the 'truce' - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Unfortunately, social issues have a huge impact on the economy.

Though I haven't seen any evidence that the right is failing to focus on the economy.

Perhaps the left just feels bad about the bullshit crap they push and is projecting that onto the right. For example, the putrid insistence that we continue to increase funding of spectacular social programs....like obamacare....that causes the right to address social issues.

Wrong. Avarice, bigotry and callousness are the cause for the Right addressing social issues.

Avarice?? Bigotgry?? Callousness?? Excuse me while I LMAO.

How about we're sick and tired of being forced to pay the expenses for other peoples lives??

How about we're sick and tired of being made responsible for other peoples resonsibilities??

If you don't mind the expense of being financialy responsible for others well whip out your wallet and your checkbook and you and folks like you can spend to your hearts content.

I'm sure you'll feel good about yourselves.

Until your money runs out that is. And it will.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Some social issues are tied to the economy, like welfare, obamacare, grants, loans and other programs that get money.

To say just look at the economy only and completely ignore social issues that affect the economy seems off.

but crap like gay marriage is a states issue, so it's irrelevant. working abortion, again, is a waste of time. things like that.

ALL government issues are social issues. Everything the government does affects some part of or all of society. That includes taxing, spending, treaties, grants, regulation, policy, as well as government charity in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all the myriad number of programs specifically targeted at the poor. Every decision of government that affect business at ANY level will affect society either for better or worse. Every tax dollar taken and spent affects somebody. Every dime added to the deficit and national debt will have an impact on society.

Midcans accused conservative/Republican policy only taking care of the rich. A more realistic person might rightfully point out that you cannot attack or punish that same rich without hurting the poor.

A small but highly vocal and active segment of society wants to confiscate what the rich have on the theory that this will help the poor.

A more realistic mainstream knows that encouraging people to become rich and thereby save, invest, start, expand, and grow businesses that need people to work in them and become more prosperous, even rich, is the very best way to help the poor.

Feeling righteous by encouraging people through government policy to become or remain poor is being REALLY out of touch with most of the people.

hmm

Well by that definition there is not such thing as a fiscal conservative, were all just a bunch of social conservatives.

I don't buy that.

sure, any social issue that's paid for with taxes is still social, but it's also fiscal, which to me, makes it more a fiscal issue, b/c we can't rid ourselves of these entitlements. The social part is done with, now we need to manage the money.

There's plenty of social issues that don't reflect on the economy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Some social issues are tied to the economy, like welfare, obamacare, grants, loans and other programs that get money.

To say just look at the economy only and completely ignore social issues that affect the economy seems off.

but crap like gay marriage is a states issue, so it's irrelevant. working abortion, again, is a waste of time. things like that.

ALL government issues are social issues. Everything the government does affects some part of or all of society. That includes taxing, spending, treaties, grants, regulation, policy, as well as government charity in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all the myriad number of programs specifically targeted at the poor. Every decision of government that affect business at ANY level will affect society either for better or worse. Every tax dollar taken and spent affects somebody. Every dime added to the deficit and national debt will have an impact on society.

Midcans accused conservative/Republican policy only taking care of the rich. A more realistic person might rightfully point out that you cannot attack or punish that same rich without hurting the poor.

A small but highly vocal and active segment of society wants to confiscate what the rich have on the theory that this will help the poor.

A more realistic mainstream knows that encouraging people to become rich and thereby save, invest, start, expand, and grow businesses that need people to work in them and become more prosperous, even rich, is the very best way to help the poor.

Feeling righteous by encouraging people through government policy to become or remain poor is being REALLY out of touch with most of the people.

hmm

Well by that definition there is not such thing as a fiscal conservative, were all just a bunch of social conservatives.

I don't buy that.

sure, any social issue that's paid for with taxes is still social, but it's also fiscal, which to me, makes it more a fiscal issue, b/c we can't rid ourselves of these entitlements. The social part is done with, now we need to manage the money.

There's plenty of social issues that don't reflect on the economy.

An intersting and far more nuanced view was explained by Jeffrey Rosen, New Republic Magazine Legal Affairs Editor, who divided conservatives into at least three groups with differing perspectives:

a. Tea Party Constitutionalists. Hero is Justice Thomas, a religious conservative, anti-federalist, opposition to elites. The beliefs of this group can be found in “The Five Thousand Year Leap,” by W. Cleon Skousen,… 28 Principles of Freedom our Founding Fathers said must be understood and perpetuated by every people who desire peace, prosperity, and freedom. Learn how adherence to these beliefs during the past 200 years has brought about more progress than was made in the previous 5000 years. These 28 Principles include The Genius of Natural Law, Virtuous and Moral Leaders, Equal Rights--Not Equal Things, and Avoiding the Burden of Debt. This populist conservative group would find itself at odds with the next two.

b. Libertarianism: As represented by the Cato Institute. Pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, supports Roe v. Wade, and supports judicial activism aimed as recognizing gay marriage and healthcare reform, and repeal of the Gun-Free School Zone Act and much of the administrative state. Hero might be Judge Douglas Ginsburg [who called for the ‘resurrection of the Constitution in exile,’ restrictions on federal power]

c. Pro-Business Conservatives: represented by policies of the US Chamber of Commerce, strongly represented on the Roberts’ Court, where they won some 13 of 18 cases in which they filed a brief. Most business cases are unanimous or 7-2 decisions, vs those cases that deal with culture war issues. These conservatives favored TARP, and he use of federal pre-emption (federal law to take precedence over or to displace a state law) for farm subsidies, healthcare cases. Based on this sentiment, a court which has embraced a broad vision of federal power, as found in regulation of medical marijuana, expect the Roberts Court to reject the pro-states rights view that would lead to the invalidation of the healthcare case.

 

[Two Thumbs]

ALL government issues are social issues. Everything the government does affects some part of or all of society. That includes taxing, spending, treaties, grants, regulation, policy, as well as government charity in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all the myriad number of programs specifically targeted at the poor. Every decision of government that affect business at ANY level will affect society either for better or worse. Every tax dollar taken and spent affects somebody. Every dime added to the deficit and national debt will have an impact on society.

Midcans accused conservative/Republican policy only taking care of the rich. A more realistic person might rightfully point out that you cannot attack or punish that same rich without hurting the poor.

A small but highly vocal and active segment of society wants to confiscate what the rich have on the theory that this will help the poor.

A more realistic mainstream knows that encouraging people to become rich and thereby save, invest, start, expand, and grow businesses that need people to work in them and become more prosperous, even rich, is the very best way to help the poor.

Feeling righteous by encouraging people through government policy to become or remain poor is being REALLY out of touch with most of the people.

hmm

Well by that definition there is not such thing as a fiscal conservative, were all just a bunch of social conservatives.

I don't buy that.

sure, any social issue that's paid for with taxes is still social, but it's also fiscal, which to me, makes it more a fiscal issue, b/c we can't rid ourselves of these entitlements. The social part is done with, now we need to manage the money.

There's plenty of social issues that don't reflect on the economy.

An intersting and far more nuanced view was explained by Jeffrey Rosen, New Republic Magazine Legal Affairs Editor, who divided conservatives into at least three groups with differing perspectives:

a. Tea Party Constitutionalists. Hero is Justice Thomas, a religious conservative, anti-federalist, opposition to elites. The beliefs of this group can be found in “The Five Thousand Year Leap,” by W. Cleon Skousen,… 28 Principles of Freedom our Founding Fathers said must be understood and perpetuated by every people who desire peace, prosperity, and freedom. Learn how adherence to these beliefs during the past 200 years has brought about more progress than was made in the previous 5000 years. These 28 Principles include The Genius of Natural Law, Virtuous and Moral Leaders, Equal Rights--Not Equal Things, and Avoiding the Burden of Debt.

This populist conservative group would find itself at odds with the next two.

b. Libertarianism: As represented by the Cato Institute. Pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, supports Roe v. Wade, and supports judicial activism aimed as recognizing gay marriage and healthcare reform, and repeal of the Gun-Free School Zone Act and much of the administrative state. Hero might be Judge Douglas Ginsburg [who called for the ‘resurrection of the Constitution in exile,’ restrictions on federal power]

c. Pro-Business Conservatives: represented by policies of the US Chamber of Commerce, strongly represented on the Roberts’ Court, where they won some 13 of 18 cases in which they filed a brief. Most business cases are unanimous or 7-2 decisions, vs those cases that deal with culture war issues. These conservatives favored TARP, and he use of federal pre-emption (federal law to take precedence over or to displace a state law) for farm subsidies, healthcare cases. Based on this sentiment, a court which has embraced a broad vision of federal power, as found in regulation of medical marijuana, expect the Roberts Court to reject the pro-states rights view that would lead to the invalidation of the healthcare case.

Please don't copy/paste anothers words. We all know you are very well read and have a deep memory well.

but it pisses me off

I don't get paid to break every conservative down, or study them. I underlined everything I can get with, notice I fall into all 3 groups.

"An intersting and far more nuanced view" that's insulting, I don't have all day, or weeks to come up with each post.


Please use your own words, you tend to blather on, but I read each of your posts from start to stop, b/c your brilliance and insite realy shine through.

 

[Foxfyre]

Some social issues are tied to the economy, like welfare, obamacare, grants, loans and other programs that get money.

To say just look at the economy only and completely ignore social issues that affect the economy seems off.

but crap like gay marriage is a states issue, so it's irrelevant. working abortion, again, is a waste of time. things like that.

ALL government issues are social issues. Everything the government does affects some part of or all of society. That includes taxing, spending, treaties, grants, regulation, policy, as well as government charity in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all the myriad number of programs specifically targeted at the poor. Every decision of government that affect business at ANY level will affect society either for better or worse. Every tax dollar taken and spent affects somebody. Every dime added to the deficit and national debt will have an impact on society.

Midcans accused conservative/Republican policy only taking care of the rich. A more realistic person might rightfully point out that you cannot attack or punish that same rich without hurting the poor.

A small but highly vocal and active segment of society wants to confiscate what the rich have on the theory that this will help the poor.

A more realistic mainstream knows that encouraging people to become rich and thereby save, invest, start, expand, and grow businesses that need people to work in them and become more prosperous, even rich, is the very best way to help the poor.

Feeling righteous by encouraging people through government policy to become or remain poor is being REALLY out of touch with most of the people.

hmm

Well by that definition there is not such thing as a fiscal conservative, were all just a bunch of social conservatives.

I don't buy that.

sure, any social issue that's paid for with taxes is still social, but it's also fiscal, which to me, makes it more a fiscal issue, b/c we can't rid ourselves of these entitlements. The social part is done with, now we need to manage the money.

There's plenty of social issues that don't reflect on the economy.

Read what I wrote more careful. Social issues are those that directly impact on people, their finances, their quality of life, their rights including freedom, their privileges, options, choices, opportunities--ALL of it.

You cannot deal with any aspects of finance at the government level that does not impact society. And you would be hard put to name a so-called social issue that did not impact the economy in some regard either directly or indirectly.

 

[zzzz]

Abortion, gays in the miltary, and those kinds of things are what I perceive he was talking about. Certainly health care is in both areas as it impacts the society and its financial cost. But the fringe areas that take up a lot of time and energy that can be commited working on how to fix this economy can be tabled for a little while. The Republicans in the House have been working on a plan to help the economy but lets not get sidetracked on a tangent issue.

 

[Foxfyre]

Abortion, gays in the miltary, and those kinds of things are what I perceive he was talking about. Certainly health care is in both areas as it impacts the society and its financial cost. But the fringe areas that take up a lot of time and energy that can be commited working on how to fix this economy can be tabled for a little while. The Republicans in the House have been working on a plan to help the economy but lets not get sidetracked on a tangent issue.

But abortion isn't revenue neutral. Putting it in the most mercenary terms, some that support abortion, at least in part, do so on the grounds there are already too many people in the world; and they think that way based on available resources. (Of course these same people mostly want to provide services to illegals.) Some who oppose abortion, at least in part, think that we need more taxpayer citizens to support the infirm and elderly. And as the laws currently exist, the taxpayer is paying for abortions for illegals, for those on Medicaid or otherwise on government subsidies, etc. as well as paying for those who choose to have the children. And we're paying for their children.

Admittedly, personal convictions re abortion go way beyond the strictly monetary concerns, but I'm tryng to stay focused on a specific economic principle here.

Gay marriage entitles same sex couples with certain government benefits that are often not currently available to singles. And those benefits are not without cost to somebody. In fact, it has been economics that has been the foundation of arguments in favor of gay marriage.

Gays in the military, if that goes smoothly and without making special accommodations for anybody won't have much, if any, economic impact. If it eventually becomes advisable to provide separate quarters for gays as separate quarters are provided for men and women, however, then there will be an economic impact, but I do think that is a stretch.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Well that' pretty much what President Obama suggested in the State of the Union speech. Let's call a truce on what has already been done and go forward civilly hand in hand with spending frozen at present levels. Meaning, of course, at the levels that have already done the damage and without correcting any of the problems that have generated a runaway deficit and debt.

To any conservative this is not acceptable.

I submit that the vast majority of Americans with a clue are more conservative than not--that would include most of mainstream Americans. So it's pretty hard to acknowledge that and say that conservatives are out of touch with the people since most of the people are at least somewhat conservative.

Then there is the political class who looks to the federal government to solve all of societies ills and who blame conservatives for all the ills of society.

Which is out of touch? Hmmmm.

Fact is the majority of Americans are in debt. Real conservatives don't believe in debt, or so many self defined conservatives suggest. I submit most of the conservatives who post on this MB have debt, likely you too, Foxfyre.
Faux conservatives, the type who post here ad nauseaum, are easy to identify. They wear their values in each post they submit - avarice, bigotry and callous disregard for others.