Conservatives used to care about community. What happened?

[Sallow]

This thread is another lie using a hit-piece from a lib writer at the Washington Post. I've seen this idiot on NBC too many times to think he's objective.

He's trying to redefine Mitt Romney.

First they call him a liberal to marginalize him during the primaries.

Then they try to make him look like a Tea Party member during the general election.......even though the primaries aren't even over yet.

The left is supposed to think he's a Neocon while the right is supposed to think he's moderate that wants to raise taxes or some such nonsense.


It's not gonna work.

The NeoCon thing is about right.

Romney is importing many of the old Bushies into his team.

You liked Bush? Well you are gonna love the Bishop.

 

[Buford]

For the record..I don't hate conservatives. Heck..I don't hate racists..

I don't really hate anyone.

But holding up a mirror every so often..is useful.

Are Black Americans who oppose Obama considered "racist"?

I dunno.

Do they think whites are inferior?

Got a link?

So the white Americans who oppose Obama think blacks are inferior? You better slow down before you fall off the cliff.

 

[Sallow]

Are Black Americans who oppose Obama considered "racist"?

I dunno.

Do they think whites are inferior?

Got a link?

So the white Americans who oppose Obama think blacks are inferior? You better slow down before you fall off the cliff.

Some do..some don't.

Depends on who you talk too.

Like Bachmann..or Gingrich..those two are true blue racists.

Gotta love 'em..

 

[Harry Dresden]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

I'll stand by what I posted.

Conservativism is part and parcel with "self".

And that's it.

christ Sallow....i used to think you were a few steps up from dipshits like Dean......i guess i am wrong.....you wanna see some selfish Democrats....come to California.....out here its not a problem to them until it affects them personally.....then its a problem......

 

[LeftofLeft]

This thread is another lie using a hit-piece from a lib writer at the Washington Post. I've seen this idiot on NBC too many times to think he's objective.

He's trying to redefine Mitt Romney.

First they call him a liberal to marginalize him during the primaries.

Then they try to make him look like a Tea Party member during the general election.......even though the primaries aren't even over yet.

The left is supposed to think he's a Neocon while the right is supposed to think he's moderate that wants to raise taxes or some such nonsense.


It's not gonna work.

Agreed. The Left plays this game all of the time. When the mix of candidates takes the field, they throw their support behind the one who is the most tolerant, more moderate (e.g. SEE Dole, McCain, Romney). Then, when one of them is the candidate, they get branded as extremists. When will Republicans learn? Reagan and Bush II stayed conservative and took the gloves off. Obama brought his gun to the knife fight with McCain and McCain just stood there and took it wondering where all of his friends from the Left were.

Romney had better learn and not worry what the Left thinks of him. Surely, Obama does not care what Conservatives think of him.

 

[mudwhistle]

This thread is another lie using a hit-piece from a lib writer at the Washington Post. I've seen this idiot on NBC too many times to think he's objective.

He's trying to redefine Mitt Romney.

First they call him a liberal to marginalize him during the primaries.

Then they try to make him look like a Tea Party member during the general election.......even though the primaries aren't even over yet.

The left is supposed to think he's a Neocon while the right is supposed to think he's moderate that wants to raise taxes or some such nonsense.


It's not gonna work.

The NeoCon thing is about right.

Romney is importing many of the old Bushies into his team.

You liked Bush? Well you are gonna love the Bishop.

If you say so......but Obama didn't know anything about running a White House, so his staff has a lot of Clinton's people in it.

That's normal. Get someone at first that's been there before.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Govt builds slums and blighted areas. Individuals build community.

Tough concept for the left I guess. Glad I'm not that dense.

right on!!!!!!! the left "Forces" people......aka imposing their views on people, but they say republicans do. Apparently they dont see any major inner city in the US as well as why white people keep moving further away from the city. I really think the republicans should start a halfway house in Pelosi's neighborhood, I bet those liberals would fight it, with all they have....but it's ok to have one in a poor man's neighborhood and they tell us those criminals are fine to be on the streets

You guys got this reality all your own...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9PjGXP0iC8]Homer vs New York - YouTube[/ame]

Wrong.

I worked for the ACOE for about 6 years as a remodeling contractor about 15 years ago. I completely redid the projects on Paseo here in KC. They were in horrible conditions before I started. They shuffled the residents around as I moved from one end of the buildings to the other. I wouldn't even be out of the first building before the repair calls started coming in. The buildings now look to be in the same condition they were 18 years ago. Yet the govt keeps throwing money at them, never learning that it doesn't solve the problem of poverty and only succeeds to drive down the values of surrounding areas.

 

[Sallow]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

I'll stand by what I posted.

Conservativism is part and parcel with "self".

And that's it.

christ Sallow....i used to think you were a few steps up from dipshits like Dean......i guess i am wrong.....you wanna see some selfish Democrats....come to California.....out here its not a problem to them until it affects them personally.....then its a problem......

I use to live in California.

Check the threads..I think people (Liberal or Conservative), voting on whether to tax themselves..or cut services..is a bad idea.

Because they will cut taxes..and lop on services every single time.

 

[Sallow]

This thread is another lie using a hit-piece from a lib writer at the Washington Post. I've seen this idiot on NBC too many times to think he's objective.

He's trying to redefine Mitt Romney.

First they call him a liberal to marginalize him during the primaries.

Then they try to make him look like a Tea Party member during the general election.......even though the primaries aren't even over yet.

The left is supposed to think he's a Neocon while the right is supposed to think he's moderate that wants to raise taxes or some such nonsense.


It's not gonna work.

The NeoCon thing is about right.

Romney is importing many of the old Bushies into his team.

You liked Bush? Well you are gonna love the Bishop.

If you say so......but Obama didn't know anything about running a White House, so his staff has a lot of Clinton's people in it.

That's normal. Get someone at first that's been there before.

I thought Clinton was a great president.

So I am happy.

 

[peach174]

They only care about communities in other countries. In this country, they call that "socialism".

I'll stand by what I posted.

Conservativism is part and parcel with "self".

And that's it.

You are like many of the left, leaving off the ending of things.
Self Reliance not self.

 

[The T]

This thread is another lie using a hit-piece from a lib writer at the Washington Post. I've seen this idiot on NBC too many times to think he's objective.

He's trying to redefine Mitt Romney.

First they call him a liberal to marginalize him during the primaries.

Then they try to make him look like a Tea Party member during the general election.......even though the primaries aren't even over yet.

The left is supposed to think he's a Neocon while the right is supposed to think he's moderate that wants to raise taxes or some such nonsense.


It's not gonna work.

The NeoCon thing is about right.

Romney is importing many of the old Bushies into his team.

You liked Bush? Well you are gonna love the Bishop.

If you say so......but Obama didn't know anything about running a White House, so his staff has a lot of Clinton's people in it.

That's normal. Get someone at first that's been there before.

And be mindful Bill wants back in there.

 

[Sallow]

right on!!!!!!! the left "Forces" people......aka imposing their views on people, but they say republicans do. Apparently they dont see any major inner city in the US as well as why white people keep moving further away from the city. I really think the republicans should start a halfway house in Pelosi's neighborhood, I bet those liberals would fight it, with all they have....but it's ok to have one in a poor man's neighborhood and they tell us those criminals are fine to be on the streets

You guys got this reality all your own...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9PjGXP0iC8]Homer vs New York - YouTube[/ame]

Wrong.

I worked for the ACOE for about 6 years as a remodeling contractor about 15 years ago. I completely redid the projects on Paseo here in KC. They were in horrible conditions before I started. They shuffled the residents around as I moved from one end of the buildings to the other. I wouldn't even be out of the first building before the repair calls started coming in. The buildings now look to be in the same condition they were 18 years ago. Yet the govt keeps throwing money at them, never learning that it doesn't solve the problem of poverty and only succeeds to drive down the values of surrounding areas.

Part of the problem with your scenario is the part where you stick people with no idea of how to take care of themselves or others into the same community and expect good results. There needs to be other components to that..like education..or at least job training. Something you guys want nothing to do with..let alone just giving people enough to survive.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives never really embraced 'community'.

Conservatives want the poor poorer and the rich richer. Every policy that effects that situation that they advocate advances that cause.

You have that backwards.
It's Dem's policies who have kept the poor poorer called welfare checks.
It's Dem's policies who have helped the rich get richer.
Socialism always destroys the middle class.

That is the myth that conservatives use to salve their conscience and rationalize their greed...

...well, it hurts poor people to help them, so I don't have to feel guilty about not wanting to help them...

a perfect greed is good excuse.

BTW,

isn't it funny that conservatives in one moment are telling everyone that helping the poor is bad for the poor,

but in the next moment those same conservatives are bragging about how much they donate to charities...FOR THE POOR??????

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You guys got this reality all your own...

Homer vs New York - YouTube

Wrong.

I worked for the ACOE for about 6 years as a remodeling contractor about 15 years ago. I completely redid the projects on Paseo here in KC. They were in horrible conditions before I started. They shuffled the residents around as I moved from one end of the buildings to the other. I wouldn't even be out of the first building before the repair calls started coming in. The buildings now look to be in the same condition they were 18 years ago. Yet the govt keeps throwing money at them, never learning that it doesn't solve the problem of poverty and only succeeds to drive down the values of surrounding areas.

Part of the problem with your scenario is the part where you stick people with no idea of how to take care of themselves or others into the same community and expect good results. There needs to be other components to that..like education..or at least job training. Something you guys want nothing to do with..let alone just giving people enough to survive.

Wrong again.

Newt and others offered training and work ideas for those on welfare and your side called it slave labor and insulting.

You can't fucking have it both ways sallow.

 

[Buford]

You guys got this reality all your own...

Homer vs New York - YouTube

Wrong.

I worked for the ACOE for about 6 years as a remodeling contractor about 15 years ago. I completely redid the projects on Paseo here in KC. They were in horrible conditions before I started. They shuffled the residents around as I moved from one end of the buildings to the other. I wouldn't even be out of the first building before the repair calls started coming in. The buildings now look to be in the same condition they were 18 years ago. Yet the govt keeps throwing money at them, never learning that it doesn't solve the problem of poverty and only succeeds to drive down the values of surrounding areas.

Part of the problem with your scenario is the part where you stick people with no idea of how to take care of themselves or others into the same community and expect good results. There needs to be other components to that..like education..or at least job training. Something you guys want nothing to do with..let alone just giving people enough to survive.

Spewing propaganda is so easy that even a parrot can do it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuKqWEYzhEA]Smokey says Yes, We Can! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[The T]

Wrong.

I worked for the ACOE for about 6 years as a remodeling contractor about 15 years ago. I completely redid the projects on Paseo here in KC. They were in horrible conditions before I started. They shuffled the residents around as I moved from one end of the buildings to the other. I wouldn't even be out of the first building before the repair calls started coming in. The buildings now look to be in the same condition they were 18 years ago. Yet the govt keeps throwing money at them, never learning that it doesn't solve the problem of poverty and only succeeds to drive down the values of surrounding areas.

Part of the problem with your scenario is the part where you stick people with no idea of how to take care of themselves or others into the same community and expect good results. There needs to be other components to that..like education..or at least job training. Something you guys want nothing to do with..let alone just giving people enough to survive.

Wrong again.

Newt and others offered training and work ideas for those on welfare and your side called it slave labor and insulting.

You can't fucking have it both ways sallow.

It was insulting only because the free ride for some was over.

 

[LeftofLeft]

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

To secure his standing as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has disowned every sliver of moderation in his record. He’s moved to the right on tax cuts and twisted himself into a pretzel over the health-care plan he championed in Massachusetts — because conservatives are no longer allowed to acknowledge that government can improve citizens’ lives.

Romney is simply following the lead of Republicans in Congress who have abandoned American conservatism’s most attractive features: prudence, caution and a sense that change should be gradual. But most important, conservatism used to care passionately about fostering community, and it no longer does. This commitment now lies buried beneath slogans that lift up the heroic and disconnected individual — or the “job creator” — with little concern for the rest.

Today’s conservatism is about low taxes, fewer regulations, less government — and little else. Anyone who dares to define it differently faces political extinction. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was considered a solid conservative , until conservatives decided that anyone who seeks bipartisan consensus on anything is a sellout. Even Orrin Hatch of Utah, one of the longest-serving Republican senators, is facing a primary challenge. His flaw? He occasionally collaborated with the late Democratic senator Edward M. Kennedy on providing health insurance coverage for children and encouraging young Americans to join national service programs. In the eyes of Hatch’s onetime allies, these commitments make him an ultra-leftist.

I have long admired the conservative tradition and for years have written about it with great respect. But the new conservatism, for all its claims of representing the values that inspired our founders, breaks with the country’s deepest traditions. The United States rose to power and wealth on the basis of a balance between the public and the private spheres, between government and the marketplace, and between our love of individualism and our quest for community.

Conservatism today places individualism on a pedestal, but it originally arose in revolt against that idea. As the conservative thinker Robert A. Nisbet noted in 1968, conservatism represented a “reaction to the individualistic Enlightenment.” It “stressed the small social groups of society” and regarded such clusters of humanity — not individuals — as society’s “irreducible unit.”

True, conservatives continue to preach the importance of the family as a communal unit. But for Nisbet and many other conservatives of his era, the movement was about something larger. It “insisted upon the primacy of society to the individual — historically, logically and ethically.”

Because of the depth of our commitment to individual liberty, Americans never fully adopted this all-encompassing view of community. But we never fully rejected it, either. And therein lies the genius of the American tradition: We were born with a divided political heart. From the beginning, we have been torn by a deep but healthy tension between individualism and community. We are communitarian individualists or individualistic communitarians, but we have rarely been comfortable with being all one or all the other.

Much More: Conservatives used to care about community. What happened? - The Washington Post

Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was considered a solid conservative

When an OPED Columnist from the Washington Post is calling you a 'solid conservative', how conservative can you really be? Conservatives seeking or receiving endorsements from Liberals are doomed to fail. Liberals are only in search of 'conservatives' that will do their bidding like Lugar or Colin Powell. How relevant, in either Party, are either of these two? Powell thought he was going to get rewarded by Obama for coming out and endorsing him in 2008. Powell, a 'conservative' that Liberals liked, is a man without a tent.....neither party is letting him in.

 

[Buford]

If the Washington Post labels you a "Solid Conservative", you can bet your sweet bippy that "Solid Conservative" is a politician who doesn't stand on core convictions.

 

[The T]

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

To secure his standing as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has disowned every sliver of moderation in his record. He’s moved to the right on tax cuts and twisted himself into a pretzel over the health-care plan he championed in Massachusetts — because conservatives are no longer allowed to acknowledge that government can improve citizens’ lives.

Romney is simply following the lead of Republicans in Congress who have abandoned American conservatism’s most attractive features: prudence, caution and a sense that change should be gradual. But most important, conservatism used to care passionately about fostering community, and it no longer does. This commitment now lies buried beneath slogans that lift up the heroic and disconnected individual — or the “job creator” — with little concern for the rest.

Today’s conservatism is about low taxes, fewer regulations, less government — and little else. Anyone who dares to define it differently faces political extinction. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was considered a solid conservative , until conservatives decided that anyone who seeks bipartisan consensus on anything is a sellout. Even Orrin Hatch of Utah, one of the longest-serving Republican senators, is facing a primary challenge. His flaw? He occasionally collaborated with the late Democratic senator Edward M. Kennedy on providing health insurance coverage for children and encouraging young Americans to join national service programs. In the eyes of Hatch’s onetime allies, these commitments make him an ultra-leftist.

I have long admired the conservative tradition and for years have written about it with great respect. But the new conservatism, for all its claims of representing the values that inspired our founders, breaks with the country’s deepest traditions. The United States rose to power and wealth on the basis of a balance between the public and the private spheres, between government and the marketplace, and between our love of individualism and our quest for community.

Conservatism today places individualism on a pedestal, but it originally arose in revolt against that idea. As the conservative thinker Robert A. Nisbet noted in 1968, conservatism represented a “reaction to the individualistic Enlightenment.” It “stressed the small social groups of society” and regarded such clusters of humanity — not individuals — as society’s “irreducible unit.”

True, conservatives continue to preach the importance of the family as a communal unit. But for Nisbet and many other conservatives of his era, the movement was about something larger. It “insisted upon the primacy of society to the individual — historically, logically and ethically.”

Because of the depth of our commitment to individual liberty, Americans never fully adopted this all-encompassing view of community. But we never fully rejected it, either. And therein lies the genius of the American tradition: We were born with a divided political heart. From the beginning, we have been torn by a deep but healthy tension between individualism and community. We are communitarian individualists or individualistic communitarians, but we have rarely been comfortable with being all one or all the other.

Much More: Conservatives used to care about community. What happened? - The Washington Post

Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana was considered a solid conservative

When an OPED Columnist from the Washington Post is calling you a 'solid conservative', how conservative can you really be? Conservatives seeking or receiving endorsements from Liberals are doomed to fail. Liberals are only in search of 'conservatives' that will do their bidding like Lugar or Colin Powell. How relevant, in either Party, are either of these two? Powell thought he was going to get rewarded by Obama for coming out and endorsing him in 2008. Powell, a 'conservative' that Liberals liked, is a man without a tent.....neither party is letting him in.

Another example would be John McCain. Remember as the liberal media dubbed him a MAVERICK for daring to side with the left?

 

[The T]

If the Washington Post labels you a "Solid Conservative", you can bet your sweet bippy that "Solid Conservative" is a politician who doesn't stand on core convictions.

And are usually confused RINO's...now if they call you raqdical, extreme 'rightwing'? Thos are the people Conservatives should seriously look upon.