CDZ Liberals don't understand how diverse the conservative movement is, and they think we're all the sam

[320 Years of History]

Independent = Someone who doesn't need a party to spoon feed public policy to them and who is unwilling to debase themselves by answering to the same rallying call as the extremists in any party.


"What people call you doesn't matter. It's what you answer to that matters."
-- I can't tell you who first said that

Political parties weren't always defined by what they said. They were defined by what they did. Neither the Republican Party or Democratic Party have taken any radical extremist action ever. The other third parties haven't ever done anything radical either. Talking is not doing. The two mainstream parties are determined to do nothing these days. That's why they are being judged by the radical things they say because there are no actions to judge them by anymore. I'm optimistic. I think 2017-2018 we are going to see somethings happen either good or bad to give the parties a legitimate identity.

Political parties, like all other groups, have always been defined by the people who belong to them, and it is what they say and do that defines the party. That, of course, means that there isn't always a binary way of identifying what a party stands for, and that in turn poses a problem for those among us who cannot consider things multidimensionally.

As with all groups, there are leaders and followers in political parties, which are merely groups focused on achieving public policy objectives. But make no mistake, the objectives achieved are, by definition, those sought by the leaders, not the followers. That basic dynamic is so no matter the party.

That dynamic's verity is why I some time back created a thread asking why droves and millions of "regular folks" self-identify as Republicans. The GOP is not now nor ever has been in recent times a party aimed at achieving public policy that benefits anyone who is not among the nation's "haves." After all, a material part of the very purpose, nature and definition of conservatism is to resist change not embrace it. The fact of the matter is that the world in which we live -- the U.S. itself as well as the rest of the world -- has changed dramatically, and conservatives want to do as much as they can to impede (in cases reverse) not only the changes themselves, but also their impacts.

It's not hard to grasp why that is. Folks have lived with and in a given paradigm and change means they have to learn how to thrive under a new one. That takes work; it requires oneself to evolve. It's, quite simply, easier not to, but easier isn't necessarily better, or even good for that matter.

 

[presonorek]

Personally, I think non-conservatives don't think all conservatives are the same. I think instead that the problem is that there is currently a maniac leading the conservative movement and that scares people.

Are you guys interchanging the word conservative and republican? You do know that they aren't the same thing at all.

"You guys?" I'm just one person. (Is there someone else in the quote and I don't see their remark?)

No, I'm not conflating conservatives and Republicans, nor for that matter Conservatives and conservatives, or Republicans and republicans, and the various combinations thereof.

Yes. Blackrook seemed to be using the term conservative when the term Republican was more appropriate. There is no such thing as a moderate conservative but there are moderate Republicans.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Conservatives are very diverse. They include the entire spectrum to the Right of Genghis Khan. They seem to be anchored somewhere around Joe McCarthy. I'm a little suspicious of Ann Coulter, though. She seems a little pink, to me.

 

[BULLDOG]

RINOs haven't realized that they are no longer conservatives.

I used to believe that RINO mean Republican In Name Only. That would be members of the Republican Party that don't vote with the party. I later found out that a RINO was just a fancy way of saying practical pragmatic. If you aren't an unrealistic idealist then you are a RINO. Now I proudly proclaim that I am a RINO and will always vote for RINOs. The party has to stick together if they want to accomplish anything. 248 idealistic republicans going in 496 different directions aren't going to accomplish anything. 248 RINO's that elect a speaker and then vote with him 100% of the time can get a lot accomplished. I prefer RINOs to delusional kooks. My congressman is the biggest nutjob in congress. He is going to take on the world all by himself and the voters eat it up. Anybody who runs against him gets slaughtered.

Gohmert your congressman?

 

[presonorek]

RINOs haven't realized that they are no longer conservatives.

I used to believe that RINO mean Republican In Name Only. That would be members of the Republican Party that don't vote with the party. I later found out that a RINO was just a fancy way of saying practical pragmatic. If you aren't an unrealistic idealist then you are a RINO. Now I proudly proclaim that I am a RINO and will always vote for RINOs. The party has to stick together if they want to accomplish anything. 248 idealistic republicans going in 496 different directions aren't going to accomplish anything. 248 RINO's that elect a speaker and then vote with him 100% of the time can get a lot accomplished. I prefer RINOs to delusional kooks. My congressman is the biggest nutjob in congress. He is going to take on the world all by himself and the voters eat it up. Anybody who runs against him gets slaughtered.

Gohmert your congressman?

3rd District Walter Jones. He talks to directly to God and stands up for what is right. Voters love that type of rhetoric and inaction. He usually gets 65+% of the vote in the primaries and the general election. 2014 was a freak of nature. He only won by 5.83%. That same candidate (Taylor Griffin) ran again in 2016 and he only got 14.86% of the vote. Loony tunes like Blackrook are the majority in the 3rd District of North Carolina. They vote for the guys who scream and pitch a fit about abortion and talks about how much they love God.

I'm not surprised that there are two or more of these animals in North Carolina.

 

[BULLDOG]

RINOs haven't realized that they are no longer conservatives.

I used to believe that RINO mean Republican In Name Only. That would be members of the Republican Party that don't vote with the party. I later found out that a RINO was just a fancy way of saying practical pragmatic. If you aren't an unrealistic idealist then you are a RINO. Now I proudly proclaim that I am a RINO and will always vote for RINOs. The party has to stick together if they want to accomplish anything. 248 idealistic republicans going in 496 different directions aren't going to accomplish anything. 248 RINO's that elect a speaker and then vote with him 100% of the time can get a lot accomplished. I prefer RINOs to delusional kooks. My congressman is the biggest nutjob in congress. He is going to take on the world all by himself and the voters eat it up. Anybody who runs against him gets slaughtered.

Gohmert your congressman?

3rd District Walter Jones. He talks to directly to God and stands up for what is right. Voters love that type of rhetoric and inaction.

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

 

[presonorek]

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

We have to somehow purge them from the Republican Party.

 

[Vandalshandle]

All of this has happened before. the American Party could not make up their minds if they hated Catholics, foreigners (especially Chinese and Germans) or negroes, the most.

Know Nothing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Same mind set. Different villains (for the most part).

 

[320 Years of History]

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

We have to somehow purge them from the Republican Party.

Agree. Extremists of all sorts are a blight on mainstream politics and political processes. I don't understand why the two major parties allow those "nutjobs" to plague them rather than forcing them out, denying them their infiltrator role, and making them form parties of their own.

Well, that's not entirely so. I do understand one reason why: it's easier to count those folks votes in advance of elections if they are allowed to remain in the party than it would be if they were forced out of it.

 

[Votto]

Liberals don't understand how diverse the conservative movement is, and they think we're all the same.

They throw us all in the same pot and call us "RWNJ's" and "American Taliban" and other kooky names like that.

The fact is, there are perhaps a dozen kinds of conservatives, and that does not even include moderates, libertarians, independents, Tea Party types, and neo-conservatives, none of whom are really conservatives in the classic sense of the word.

And then there's the so-called "alt-right" and I'm not really sure they're really conservatives either.

To me, a conservative is a person who is, in general, well educated, almost always of the Christian faith but sometimes Jewish, and has certain viewpoints on the relationship between man and God, man and man, and man and government. The fundamental principle is the respect for the rights of the individual, including his rights to freedom of speech, freedom of worship, right to bear arms, free from unreasonable searches and seizures, privacy of his personal papers, right to own property including land and the means of production, and a host of other rights enumerated in the Constitution, or granted in natural law by our Creator.

The conservative believes that inequality in the law based on race is always wrong, whether it be white oppression of blacks, or blacks getting special treatment over whites. Conservatives have always been consistent in opposing slavery, opposing the KKK, opposing the Jim Crow laws, and opposing Affirmative Action and racial quotas.

The conservative believes that the right to own property, including land and the means of production, is just as fundamental as all the other rights, and just as essential because a man without the right to use his property as he sees fit is nothing but a slave to the whims of the state.

Beyond that, there are differences in conservatives, which is more a difference in emphasis rather than real disagreements.

A social conservative believes that social issues are also fundamental, and opposes abortion-on-demand, the radical homosexual agenda, and baseness in our culture because he believes that the society as a whole is being harmed by these things. Also, with the abortion issue, it is literally a matter of life and death. Most social conservatives believe the fetus is a human being with all the rights the Creator has granted to human beings, including the fundamental right to life.

A fiscal conservative believes that government should balance the budget and control spending, as a matter of moral principle not just a matter of good policy. Some fiscal conservatives are also social conservatives, some care less about social issues, or not at all.

A foreign policy conservative believes the United States is a force of good in the world, and should use that power to defend American interests abroad, and form alliances with friendly nations. A foreign policy conservative is very supportive of a strong defense and the military. A foreign policy conservative is NOT the same as a neo-conservative, and may be very opposed to neo-conservative goals.

A law and order conservative believes that enforcement of the laws are important, especially drug laws, since drugs have a proven harmful effect on society and young people in particular. Law and order conservatives are very supportive of the police and the FBI.

A civil rights oriented conservative is less interested in enforcing the laws, but more interested in protecting individuals from police and prosecutors, who are prone to overstep their authority in their zeal to prosecute those accused of crime. Conservatives of this type view police and prosecutors with the same level of suspicion as other conservatives view any bureaucrat.

And they don't care.

The object is to demonize your adversary dingleberry

 

[BULLDOG]

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

We have to somehow purge them from the Republican Party.

Agree. Extremists of all sorts are a blight on mainstream politics and political processes. I don't understand why the two major parties allow those "nutjobs" to plague them rather than forcing them out, denying them their infiltrator role, and making them form parties of their own.

Well, that's not entirely so. I do understand one reason why: it's easier to count those folks votes in advance of elections if they are allowed to remain in the party than if they were forced out of it.

Extremists are not plaguing the republican party. They have taken it over. Trump is the head of that party. The takeover is complete.

 

[320 Years of History]

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

We have to somehow purge them from the Republican Party.

Agree. Extremists of all sorts are a blight on mainstream politics and political processes. I don't understand why the two major parties allow those "nutjobs" to plague them rather than forcing them out, denying them their infiltrator role, and making them form parties of their own.

Well, that's not entirely so. I do understand one reason why: it's easier to count those folks votes in advance of elections if they are allowed to remain in the party than if they were forced out of it.

Extremists are not plaguing the republican party. They have taken it over. Trump is the head of that party. The takeover is complete.

Okay...that works for me too...takeover, plague, either way, the "G" of GOP no longer applies beyond the party's being literally grand by dint of size and age.

 

[presonorek]

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

We have to somehow purge them from the Republican Party.

Agree. Extremists of all sorts are a blight on mainstream politics and political processes. I don't understand why the two major parties allow those "nutjobs" to plague them rather than forcing them out, denying them their infiltrator role, and making them form parties of their own.

Well, that's not entirely so. I do understand one reason why: it's easier to count those folks votes in advance of elections if they are allowed to remain in the party than it would be if they were forced out of it.

Taking over the local party apparatus is extremely easy. It takes about 20 people. The moderates are at home chilling out on their sofa. The elected officials have to parrot the demands of the people running the party. People think the elected congressmen are idiots. That's pretty ridiculous. Elected officials are just doing their job and making speeches based upon the demands of the nutjobs that took over the Republican party. Moderate people put in a moderate amount of effort. Nutjobs have taken over the party in the past. The Tea Party nuts are just more zealous. They want to make sure the government cuts off all funding except for military retirement benefits and social security. They are ok with paying people not to work just as long as the government isn't paying people not to work.

It's like telling your wife to stop wasting money on getting her nails done while you are buying a new car and a new boat every month. They are more accurately called Reagan Conservatives. Spend like crazy on huge crap, criticize insignificant spending and cut taxes drastically. Apparently Reagan Conservatives are forbidden from using calculators.

 

[rdean]

The GOP is 90% white. Once they get rid of that 10%, THEN they will be all the same.

 

[presonorek]

Extremists are not plaguing the republican party. They have taken it over. Trump is the head of that party. The takeover is complete.

If Trump is elected I firmly believe he will bring long term sobriety to the party. Trump isn't a whack a doodle conservative. You do know that. Don't you? He's just playing the nut jobs in order to become president. I think he has only been a republican for like 4 or 5 minutes.

Personally I just don't think he'll win. The Republican ineffectiveness will continue. We'll keep winning the congress, continue accomplishing nothing and continue losing presidential elections.

 

[presonorek]

The GOP is 90% white. Once they get rid of that 10%, THEN they will be all the same.

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[rdean]

The GOP is 90% white. Once they get rid of that 10%, THEN they will be all the same.

What does that have to do with anything?

The GOP is 90% white. Once they get rid of that 10%, THEN they will be all the same.

What does that have to do with anything?

The GOP is 90% white. Once they get rid of that 10%, THEN they will be all the same.

What does that have to do with anything?

Title of the thread:

Liberals don't understand how diverse the conservative movement is, and they think we're all the sam

The GOP is 90% white. Once they get rid of that 10%, THEN they will be all the same.[

It's self evident.

 

[Correll]

Personally, I think non-conservatives don't think all conservatives are the same. I think instead that the problem is that there is currently a maniac leading the conservative movement and that scares people.

Deporting illegals, bring back manufacturing jobs, and NOT fucking with Russia.

You believe that to be madness?


If so, the problem might not be Trump...

 

[Correll]

Trump is not a conservative and he does not lead the conservative movement. He has temporarily captured the Republican Party, but it is more a hostile takeover than a real change in what the Republican Party stands for. If Trump loses the election, his influence will be quickly purged.

Conservatism is a tool to serve the interests of the nation and it's citizens.

The Party elite and the Ideologues have forgotten that, and have been failing the interests of the nation and it's citizens.


Trump is running on a Patriotic and Nationalistic platform, to advance US interests.


That is more important that ideology.

 

[Vandalshandle]

No shortage of nut jobs on the right.

We have to somehow purge them from the Republican Party.

Agree. Extremists of all sorts are a blight on mainstream politics and political processes. I don't understand why the two major parties allow those "nutjobs" to plague them rather than forcing them out, denying them their infiltrator role, and making them form parties of their own.

Well, that's not entirely so. I do understand one reason why: it's easier to count those folks votes in advance of elections if they are allowed to remain in the party than it would be if they were forced out of it.

Taking over the local party apparatus is extremely easy. It takes about 20 people. The moderates are at home chilling out on their sofa. The elected officials have to parrot the demands of the people running the party. People think the elected congressmen are idiots. That's pretty ridiculous. Elected officials are just doing their job and making speeches based upon the demands of the nutjobs that took over the Republican party. Moderate people put in a moderate amount of effort. Nutjobs have taken over the party in the past. The Tea Party nuts are just more zealous. They want to make sure the government cuts off all funding except for military retirement benefits and social security. They are ok with paying people not to work just as long as the government isn't paying people not to work.

It's like telling your wife to stop wasting money on getting her nails done while you are buying a new car and a new boat every month. They are more accurately called Reagan Conservatives. Spend like crazy on huge crap, criticize insignificant spending and cut taxes drastically. Apparently Reagan Conservatives are forbidden from using calculators.

I find it downright weird that conservatives are the first to support things like the latest aircraft carrier, at almost $30 billion , and $300 million per copy of F-35's for the Navy, and somewhere in the neighborhood of 265 military bases on foreign soil, while crying about the "democratic party driven deficit"...