Conservatives

[DiveCon]

wow, what a shock, liberals doing studies that say conservative are bad

 

[CueUp]

Understanding the Contemporary Republican Party: Authoritarians Have Taken Control
Part One in a Three-Part Series
By JOHN W. DEAN
Wednesday, Sep. 05, 2007

This is the first in a three- part series of columns in which FindLaw columnist John Dean discusses his most recent book, Conservatives Without Conscience. - Ed.

This is hysterical! Would that the "authoritarian" conservative types COULD take control of the Republican party. What we currently have, instead, is a Republican party intent on seeming more like the Democrat party; intent on adopting absurd Democrat ideas (such as global warming) as if they are valid; intent on being "liked" by everyone, but finding that there is nothing a non-liberal can do to be liked by liberals other than to simply give in and join them. I keep hoping that some good, strong, pure conservatives will once again hold sway in that party. At that point, I might be able to vote Republican again because I actually believe in what the party stands for, rather than because I feel it is just barely the lesser of two evils.

 

[Peejay]

wow, what a shock, liberals doing studies that say conservative are bad

Wow, what a shock. An incomplete, half ass puctuated sentence from a nearly illiterate conservative. You're only going to help the other side in this debate about conservative intellect. Really, you should take one for the team and sit this one out.

 

[Bfgrn]

In a study that ponders the similarities between former President Ronald Reagan, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Rush Limbaugh, four American university researchers say they now have a better understanding of what makes political conservatives tick.

Underlying psychological motivations that mark conservatives are "fear and aggression, dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity; uncertainty avoidance; need for cognitive closure; and terror management," the researchers wrote in an article, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin.

I just had to comment on this one. See the highlighted portion above. Doesn't that sort of...well...tend to throw the objectivity of the whole thing into the crapper? It would be rather like finding a "study" that starts out with the premise that goes something like this: "In a study that ponders the similarities between former President Bill Clinton, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung and Al Franken, four Heritage Foundation researchers say they now have a better understanding of what makes political liberals tick".

Stalin, Mao LIBERALS??? WOW...

THIS will really throw your whole parochial WORLD view in the "crapper"...

February 27, 1989
Soviet Conservatives Try to Turn Back the Clock on Gorbachev's Policies
By ESTHER B. FEIN, Special to the New York Times

Russian conservatives, uneasy with the liberalization of Soviet society under Mikhail S. Gorbachev, have seized on the country's experiment in more democratic elections as a chance to fight for a return to more authoritarian ways.

While many candidates and voters say they view the elections to the new Congress of Deputies as a way to further the candor and freedoms allowed by the Soviet leader, conservatives in this city and around the country were boasting last week that they had already succeeded in blocking the nomination of several prominent people regarded as liberals.

''You see the work of our hand,'' said Pavel G. Ivanov, a retired truck driver, gloating at the defeat of Vitaly A. Korotich, a magazine editor despised by conservatives as the exemplar of the new permissiveness. ''And you will see it more.'' A Disparate Alliance

The conservatives are a disparate alliance, including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearn for what they see as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church.

It is impossible to accurately gauge the extent of their influence or their support among nominees, but it is clear that conservatives are seizing upon the March 26 election, which Mr. Gorbachev has described as the key step toward greater democracy, to promote their political platform.

At election rallies where speakers call out against the influence of ''Zionist forces,'' and in campaign leaflets decrying ''liberal yellow journalists,'' representatives of politically conservative organizations are trying to draft voters and candidates to establish a foothold within the Government. New Congress of 2,250 Deputies

''We need deputies who will protect us against destructive, Zionistic forces,'' said Vladimir Ozhigonov, a factory worker, who was at a rally last Sunday, holding a sign that read: ''The movement of Pamyat will win.''

The new congress, which is to be the supreme government body, will consist of 2,250 deputies, one-third reserved for official organizations like the Communist Party, and the rest elected by the general public according to geographical districts. The congress will appoint a standing legislature and a president from among its members.

Now that the candidates have been nominated by an elaborate process of workplace and neighborhood caucuses, a monthlong general election campaign has begun. In contrast to traditional Soviet elections, where voters were offered a single candidate for each office, most of these races are contested.

Conservatives already claim credit for helping defeat certain candidates, most notably Mr. Korotich, editor of the liberal and popular magazine ''Ogonyok,'' and Andrei D. Sakharov, the physicist and Nobel Peace Prize winning dissident.

Nikita F. Zherbin, head of the Leningrad chapter of Pamyat, delighted in the fact that Mr. Korotich had been forced off the ballot in Moscow's Sverdlovsk region, and described this as the first successful step in the conservative campaign to use the elections as a vehicle for its political ideas. 'I Am a Stalinist'

''We brought our case to the people, and the outcome speaks for us,'' said Mr. Zherbin, whose group regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.

Prominent among the speeches and the placards at conservative political gatherings is support for Pamyat (Russian for ''memory''), which has been repeatedly criticized in the Soviet press for anti-Semitism.

Kira A. Korneyenkova was at the rally last Sunday outside the Ostankino Television Center, and she joined several hundred other people in enthusiastic cheers as speaker after speaker called for a fight against ''liberal, Zionist forces'' that seek to control Soviet society.

''I am a Stalinist,'' the 53-year-old schoolteacher said proudly, ''and I think our so-called glasnost has divided our nation. It is our duty to fight against such elements.'' Who the Conservatives Like

The event was advertised as ''a meeting with candidates for the Congress of Deputies from informal patriotic organizations,'' though there were no nominees explaining their platforms and cajoling voter support.

Many of those attending that rally, and other self-described conservatives who were interviewed, named people they would like to see become deputies to the new congress - including Russian nationalist writers like Valentin Rasputin, Vasily Belov and Viktor Astafyev.

Mrs. Korneyenkova said she was a great admirer of Nina A. Andreyeva, a Leningrad chemistry teacher whose letter to a newspaper last spring was deemed a manifesto of conservatism, and would be happy to see her as one of the 2,250 new legislators.

Mr. Zherbin said that while no member of Pamyat was chosen as a candidate - he said he was shouted down at one election meeting in Leningrad when he sought a nomination for himself - there ''are several candidates who have pledged their support, and they will carry out our work better if they remain unnamed.'' Anti-Jewish Slogans

The focus of the electioneering is most often to raise opposition to popular, ''liberal'' candidates, who, the speakers and listeners say, pose a danger to Soviet society.

Mr. Korotich was the candidate most maligned by conservatives. Leaflets denouncing him were distributed at elector meetings considering his nomination. At the urging of one speaker at the Ostankino rally - who wore a sweatshirt that said in Hebrew, ''Let there be de-Zionization,'' and in Russian, ''Down with the occupation by Jewish nationalists'' - the crowd began to chant loudly: ''Hang Korotich! Hang Korotich!''

''On their own, I think such extremists are without influence,'' said Mr. Korotich. ''But especially during the elections, they can be very dangerous as a stick in someone powerful's hand.''

Mr. Korotich's candidacy ended when he walked out on a nominating session in protest, after the chairman failed to recognize a call for registering all the candidates and allowing the general public to choose. When his name was later brought up for a vote anyway, he failed to receive a majority. Conservatives claim credit for this. Sakharov's Decision Dr. Sakharov, who decided not to seek a territorial nomination after being rejected by the Academy of Sciences as one of its assured candidates, was also roundly criticized for bowing to what people called an anti-Russian conspiracy.

''He's inconsistent and unreliable,'' said Valentin Novoseltsev, who described himself as an active member of Pamyat and the informal patriotic press. ''But through right-thinking people in the academy, we kept him off their list and out of the election.''

Some people complained that ''liberal'' forces had already sabotaged these elections, and that the best strategy now was to build support within ministries and state organizations. ''The elections are already corrupted,'' said Kirill Malishov, an 18-year-old student.

But most of the conservative Russians interviewed said elections for the new congress present a timely opportunity to raise the visibility of their cause by urging voters away from progressive candidates and toward conservatives, and by winning the support of the nominees themselves.

''These elections can help us,'' said Alexander Vladimorov, a 39-year-old artist. ''They can be a crucial step toward realizing our goals.''
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/27/world/soviet-conservatives-try-to-turn-back-the-clock-on-gorbachev-s-policies.html

 

[DiveCon]

wow, what a shock, liberals doing studies that say conservative are bad

Wow, what a shock. An incomplete, half ass puctuated sentence from a nearly illiterate conservative. You're only going to help the other side in this debate about conservative intellect. Really, you should take one for the team and sit this one out.

fuck off asshole

 

[CueUp]

Stalin, Mao LIBERALS??? WOW...

I kinda thought it might come as a surprise to you. You can thank me in private for contributing thusly to your education.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

How do you have 3 without infringing on 2? That's wholly contradictory. That's where these newer so called conservatives were led astray. The only thing matters is to protect the government from infringing on rights of people and to follow the Constitution word for word.

Spoken like a Ron Paul Libertarian.

Indeed. However, many Libertarians (I hazard to guess) don't agree with Ron Paul on this issue. I would also suggest that there are certain legitimate functions of government supported by the Constitution (and which, therefore, *should* be supported by Libertarians) and among those legitimate functions are national defense and national security.

Why should Libertarians limit themselves to only limiting the federal government to the Constitution? There are many problems with the Constitution. Yes, limiting the federal government to the Constitution would be a vast improvement, but certainly not perfect.

And what exactly is it that you're guessing that most Libertarians don't agree with Ron Paul about?

 

[Peejay]

fuck off asshole

Check out that shining example of conservative intellect !

I don't know where you live but if you moved to SC I'm sure you'd raise the average IQ of both places.

 

[Annie]

My bad. Wrong forum.

 

[edthecynic]

Understanding the Contemporary Republican Party: Authoritarians Have Taken Control
Part One in a Three-Part Series
By JOHN W. DEAN
Wednesday, Sep. 05, 2007

This is the first in a three- part series of columns in which FindLaw columnist John Dean discusses his most recent book, Conservatives Without Conscience. - Ed.

This is hysterical! Would that the "authoritarian" conservative types COULD take control of the Republican party. What we currently have, instead, is a Republican party intent on seeming more like the Democrat party; intent on adopting absurd Democrat ideas (such as global warming) as if they are valid; intent on being "liked" by everyone, but finding that there is nothing a non-liberal can do to be liked by liberals other than to simply give in and join them. I keep hoping that some good, strong, pure conservatives will once again hold sway in that party. At that point, I might be able to vote Republican again because I actually believe in what the party stands for, rather than because I feel it is just barely the lesser of two evils.

Because the CON$ervatism has failed so miserably since their victories in 2006 and before, CON$ervative Republicans have to be passed off as Liberal Dems.
But that wasn't what CON$ were saying back in 2006 after the election. 2006 was a great VICTORY for CON$ervatism. Back then the GOP became more CON$ervative by subtraction of "Liberal" Rockefeller Republicans and the Dems became more CON$ervative by the addition of Blue Dog Dems.
We all know what happened to the economy after this 2006 shift to the RIGHT of Congress, so now suddenly the CON$ say the MORE CON$ervative Congress of 2006-2008 was trying to be Liberal. ROFLMAO

Charles Krauthammer - Only a Minor Earthquake - washingtonpost.com
Only a Minor Earthquake
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, November 10, 2006; Page A31

This is not realignment. As has been the case for decades, American politics continues to be fought between the 40-yard lines. The Europeans fight goal line to goal line, from socialist left to ultra-nationalist right. On the American political spectrum, these extremes are negligible. American elections are fought on much narrower ideological grounds. In this election the Democrats carried the ball from their own 45-yard line to the Republican 45-yard line.

The fact that the Democrats crossed midfield does not make this election a great anti-conservative swing. Republican losses included a massacre of moderate Republicans in the Northeast and Midwest. And Democratic gains included the addition of many conservative Democrats, brilliantly recruited by Rep. Rahm Emanuel with classic Clintonian triangulation. Hence Heath Shuler of North Carolina, antiabortion, pro-gun, anti-tax -- and now a Democratic House member.

The result is that both parties have moved to the right. The Republicans have shed the last vestiges of their centrist past, the Rockefeller Republicans. And the Democrats have widened their tent to bring in a new crop of blue-dog conservatives.

America's Anchorman: Republicans Lost, But Conservatism Did Not
December 13, 2006
RUSH: Republicans lost last night but conservatism did not, and that is, to me, one of the fundamental elements of last night's results. Conservatism did not lose; Republicans lost last night. In fact, Republicanism, being a political party first rather than an ideological movement, is what lost.

There was conservatism yesterday in the election, and it was to be found on the Democratic side of the aisle. There were conservative Democrats running for office in the House of Representatives and a couple conservative Senate races won by Democrats yesterday -- Jim Webb being one. Heath Shuler, of course, is one of many... But conservatism won when it was tried yesterday. Conservatism won fairly big when it was tried, and I've heard people say, "Well, this is going to present problems for Ms. Pelosi because she's gone out there and she recruited candidates." By the way, she's being credited with this strategery, by the way, and that's why there's no question that she will be the speaker. She's been credited with putting together the strategery of recruiting moderate and conservative candidates and then getting the leadership of the House and the Democrats out of the way, no Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi to muck it up. Let these guys run in the South and the Midwest as conservatives, and let them win.
Thomas Sowell put this very well. He said the latest example of "election fraud" is actually what the Democrats did. They nominated a bunch of moderate and conservative Democrats for the express purpose of electing a far-left Democrat leadership. If you're looking for a good side, Democrats could not win this election being liberals. They could not have won the House being liberals. Maybe in some parts of the country, but all the Democrats flexing their muscles and feeling good about this have to admit here that liberalism didn't win anything yesterday.

The GOP Dumps on Conservatives, Then Blames Us for Their Losses
May 14, 2008
RUSH: This thing down in Mississippi, the special election, regardless of party, conservatives could have voted for the Republican down there, doesn't matter. In two of the three of these cases, in two of the three of these House Republican congressional losses, they have been beaten by conservative Democrats, big-time conservative, social conservative Democrats. The Republican Party is ceding conservatism in the South to the Democrat Party. You know, yesterday was a very frustrating day, as you know.

CALLER: I was wondering if the Democrats in Mississippi were more conservative than the Republicans, why wouldn't you be pleased about that as a conservative?

RUSH: You think I ought to be happy that there's conservatism out there. I'm not happy my own party wants to get rid of it. I'm mad that my own party wants to cast conservatism aside. I know there's plenty of conservatism out there. That's the source of the frustration.

Another Chick Angry at El Rushbo
Jan 29, 2008
RUSH: I am a 'movement conservative', not a Republican partisan.

 

[Bfgrn]

Stalin, Mao LIBERALS??? WOW...

I kinda thought it might come as a surprise to you. You can thank me in private for contributing thusly to your education.

Authoritarian Republicans: Understanding the Personality Type

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070905.html

I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL

Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Me

Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

 

[Annie]

Wow, almost tempted to figure out what happened since my last post. Then decided, nah, if important it will become clear.

 

[KittenKoder]

wow, what a shock, liberals doing studies that say conservative are bad

Wow, what a shock. An incomplete, half ass puctuated sentence from a nearly illiterate conservative. You're only going to help the other side in this debate about conservative intellect. Really, you should take one for the team and sit this one out.

fuck off asshole

I like that DiveCon ... pondering saving the link for future references.

Grammar police ... well ... suck ... because I hate ... grammar. We don't talk like that IRL, shy should we post like that here. Seriously. As for the topic, even I can see it's biased, and I am *gasp* middle of the road, in other words, not a Republican supporter. The study is clearly not complete.

 

[editec]

My guess would be I would get 95% correct guessing on which of my elementary school chums are arch conservatives, and which arch liberals, today.

And that's without my having seen or heard from any of them in about 40 years, too.

 

[edthecynic]

Wow, almost tempted to figure out what happened since my last post. Then decided, nah, if important it will become clear.

A wise choice!
You wouldn't have been able to handle what followed.

 

[Annie]

My guess would be I would get 95% correct guessing on which of my elementary school chums are arch conservatives, and which arch liberals, today.

And that's without my having seen or heard from any of them in about 40 years, too.

and we care about you obsession about your school chums? What the f?

 

[mash107]

Stalin, Mao LIBERALS??? WOW...

I kinda thought it might come as a surprise to you. You can thank me in private for contributing thusly to your education.

Authoritarian Republicans: Understanding the Personality Type

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070905.html

I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL

Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Me

Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

Many liberals look up to Stalin economic policies for guidance, and believe in Marxism. They also want to raise taxes like King George did on the colonials-- remember the whole "no taxation without representation" thing?

Can we just agree that there are statists/fascists/socialists/whatever you call them in both parties? There are those that like to use government to force their agenda. Those that think that government can actually solve problems, while FEMA should have been conclusive enough proof that it can't. And then there are those that want to see people free and prosperous.

Rather than having a choice between an statist and a non-statist, we have a choice between Democrat statists and Republican statists, both equally as devastating.

 

[Peejay]

I like that DiveCon ... pondering saving the link for future references.

Grammar police ... well ... suck ... because I hate ... grammar. We don't talk like that IRL, shy should we post like that here. Seriously. As for the topic, even I can see it's biased, and I am *gasp* middle of the road, in other words, not a Republican supporter. The study is clearly not complete.

Uh.....duh......in real life we have pitch and inflextion. I can't hear you in here so you have to actually put a question mark, exclamation, etc. if you intend to communicate your thoughts effectively.

I guess code doesn't have any little rules like that huh ? Symbols and such don't really matter, right ? You just leave those out because you don't talk like that ?

 

[KittenKoder]

I like that DiveCon ... pondering saving the link for future references.

Grammar police ... well ... suck ... because I hate ... grammar. We don't talk like that IRL, shy should we post like that here. Seriously. As for the topic, even I can see it's biased, and I am *gasp* middle of the road, in other words, not a Republican supporter. The study is clearly not complete.

Uh.....duh......in real life we have pitch and inflextion. I can't hear you in here so you have to actually put a question mark, exclamation, etc. if you intend to communicate your thoughts effectively.

I guess code doesn't have any little rules like that huh ? Symbols and such don't really matter, right ? You just leave those out because you don't talk like that ?

Actually ... not really, you make your own if you know what you're doing as a coder ... like accents ... sentence patterns ... grammar ...

 

[Peejay]

I like that DiveCon ... pondering saving the link for future references.

Grammar police ... well ... suck ... because I hate ... grammar. We don't talk like that IRL, shy should we post like that here. Seriously. As for the topic, even I can see it's biased, and I am *gasp* middle of the road, in other words, not a Republican supporter. The study is clearly not complete.

Uh.....duh......in real life we have pitch and inflextion. I can't hear you in here so you have to actually put a question mark, exclamation, etc. if you intend to communicate your thoughts effectively.

I guess code doesn't have any little rules like that huh ? Symbols and such don't really matter, right ? You just leave those out because you don't talk like that ?

Actually ... not really, you make your own if you know what you're doing as a coder ... like accents ... sentence patterns ... grammar ...

Accents ? Wow. How dumb can you be. You understand that accents are heard ? Right ?