Social Conservatives and Corporatists.

[whitehall]

The two main branches of the current Republican Party seem to be made up of 2 camps. The Social Conservatives and the Corporatists.

The Agenda of the Social Conservatives seems to be:
-Have the state force a woman to bring each and every fetus to term regardless of how it was conceived, the risk to the mother's life, or whether there exists financial support to raise the child.
-Include the Christian Church in governance.
-Eliminate or reduce the influence of cultures outside the Anglo-Saxon realm in this country.
-Immediately deport any non-citizen.
-Close off immigration, entirely.
-Impose a singular definition of marriage..and that being a man and women..preferably of the same race.
-Remove any laws regarding the ownership of firearms.
-Hold a foreign policy that essentially recognizes that every other nation should be subservient to the United States. The US should be feared..not respected.
-That the rich are wealthy because divinity made it so. They should rule the nation as well.
-The government in general should only be responsible for keeping and maintaining the military..as well as upholding Christian Anglo Saxon culture.
-That the United States is a Conferacy of States. States hold supremacy over the Federal government.
-Eliminate or curtail the right to vote.
-Eliminate all public education.
-Eliminate Science.
-Eliminate all art that does not glorify Christianity.
-Make each and every crime subject to life imprisonment or execution.
-Promote legislation that squelches any speech that does not fit the agenda of Social Conservativism.
-Taxes are evil and ungodly.

The Agenda of Corporatists seem to be:
-The government exists to protect the interests of corporate entities.
-Revenue should be derived in large part through government contracts, loans, tax breaks and give backs.
-Regulation of any sort is unprofitable and should never be imposed.
-Risk is to be managed by the tax payer. Profit is private.
-Voting is counter productive to the Plutocracy..and should be curtailed.
-Unions should be completely eliminated. No laws regarding employment, employee safety, and wages should be implemented.
-The Federal Bank serves no useful purpose. It should be the Financial and banking industry that controls the value of currency and interest rates.
-Profit should be the sole domain of executives, with some going to shareholders..who can be screwed at any time.
-It should be the realm of corporations to determine whether or not their products are safe. Buyer beware.
-The government exists essentially as an extention of the Corporatists.
-The military-industrial complex is a wonderful source of revenue and wars should be encouraged.

And when you combine the to..or mix and match..it's easy to understand the Conservatives and today's Republican party.

Wow fuzz face is wound up on this little distortion rant. Where did you pick it up sallow? Soros or huff n puff? Corporations r us. They create jobs and pay the salaries and employ the people. Pensions are based on corporate profits. US corporations pay the highest corporate tax in the world 35%. Obama hired a communist, I say again, a communist to be on his green jobs board but their ain't any green jobs. Barry refered to the US Chamber of Commerce as a sinister tool of the republican party and now his mind numbed robots call Americans "corporatists". It shows you how bad things have gotten since the neo-socialist was elected.

 

[Ringel05]

I'm not pissing in the wind here..I can prove most of my points with news stories, legislation or policy.

I've seen corporatism from the inside out.

And we get a daily barrage of social conservatism from congress and right wing media.

Yeah but way to generalize and stereotypically demonize. Says a lot about you.

Demonize? I think I summed both schools up very nicely in a nutshell.

I see lots of complaining..I don't see one post that pointing to specifics and saying "We don't do that.."

You summed up both schools very nicely based on you paradigm. In reality there's a much broader spectrum involved but acknowledging that would have a strong tendency to seriously undermine your partisan attack. Keep up the good work, I'm sure the DNC is proud of your contributions!!

 

[Sallow]

Yeah but way to generalize and stereotypically demonize. Says a lot about you.

Demonize? I think I summed both schools up very nicely in a nutshell.

I see lots of complaining..I don't see one post that pointing to specifics and saying "We don't do that.."

You summed up both schools very nicely based on you paradigm. In reality there's a much broader spectrum involved but acknowledging that would have a strong tendency to seriously undermine your partisan attack. Keep up the good work, I'm sure the DNC is proud of your contributions!!

Oh really. Well explain Michelle Bachmann or James Demint or Rick Santorum or Peter King or Rick Scott or Rick Perry or Lamar Smith or Joe Barton or Joe Wilson or Scott Walker...well you get the drift I hope.

 

[Ringel05]

Demonize? I think I summed both schools up very nicely in a nutshell.

I see lots of complaining..I don't see one post that pointing to specifics and saying "We don't do that.."

You summed up both schools very nicely based on you paradigm. In reality there's a much broader spectrum involved but acknowledging that would have a strong tendency to seriously undermine your partisan attack. Keep up the good work, I'm sure the DNC is proud of your contributions!!

Oh really. Well explain Michelle Bachmann or James Demint or Rick Santorum or Peter King or Rick Scott or Rick Perry or Lamar Smith or Joe Barton or Joe Wilson or Scott Walker...well you get the drift I hope.

A small sample of how many? Realize the same generalizations can be and are said about those in the DNC based on their political and social positions. Want to keep playing the game or are you ready to admit you're a willing tool?

 

[ShackledNation]

So the libertarian limited government branch is nonexistent? I think you are leaving out little old me. The Republican party has shifted to corporatism over the years, but us states rightist, small government libertarian conservatives are still here. The Tea party was heavily motivated by a small-government philosophy that all Republicans once shared.

 

[Sallow]

So the libertarian limited government branch is nonexistent? I think you are leaving out little old me. The Republican party has shifted to corporatism over the years, but us states rightist, small government libertarian conservatives are still here. The Tea party was heavily motivated by a small-government philosophy that all Republicans once shared.

"State rights" and "Small Government" harken back the days of yore when you could own people.

I ain't with that.

 

[ShackledNation]

So the libertarian limited government branch is nonexistent? I think you are leaving out little old me. The Republican party has shifted to corporatism over the years, but us states rightist, small government libertarian conservatives are still here. The Tea party was heavily motivated by a small-government philosophy that all Republicans once shared.

"State rights" and "Small Government" harken back the days of yore when you could own people.

I ain't with that.

Typical irrational response.
Slavery is now unconstitutional, so that is a moot point.

 

[Sallow]

So the libertarian limited government branch is nonexistent? I think you are leaving out little old me. The Republican party has shifted to corporatism over the years, but us states rightist, small government libertarian conservatives are still here. The Tea party was heavily motivated by a small-government philosophy that all Republicans once shared.

"State rights" and "Small Government" harken back the days of yore when you could own people.

I ain't with that.

Typical irrational response.
Slavery is now unconstitutional, so that is a moot point.

Take a gander at the Constitution. It doesn't back the notions of State rights and Small government either..

 

[dblack]

Take a gander at the Constitution.

Ok.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

 

[Sallow]

Take a gander at the Constitution.

Ok.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Yes..and?

Do you know what that means?

And do you know the entire context of it?

Did you also read the part about Constitutional supremacy?

Or Insurrection?

Or the limits on States?

How about the Powers of Congress? You up on those? They are pretty damn powerful.

 

[dblack]

Do you know what that means?

And do you know the entire context of it?

Did you also read the part about Constitutional supremacy?

Or Insurrection?

Or the limits on States?

How about the Powers of Congress? You up on those? They are pretty damn powerful.

Yes.

 

[Sallow]

Do you know what that means?

And do you know the entire context of it?

Did you also read the part about Constitutional supremacy?

Or Insurrection?

Or the limits on States?

How about the Powers of Congress? You up on those? They are pretty damn powerful.

Yes.

Then you point was what?

My take on that..is that what ever is not in the Constitution, say like Prostitution, it's up to the States to deal with it..so long as it doesn't conflict with the powers of the Federal government.

And they do.

 

[Flopper]

The two main branches of the current Republican Party seem to be made up of 2 camps. The Social Conservatives and the Corporatists.

The Agenda of the Social Conservatives seems to be:
-Have the state force a woman to bring each and every fetus to term regardless of how it was conceived, the risk to the mother's life, or whether there exists financial support to raise the child.
-Include the Christian Church in governance.
-Eliminate or reduce the influence of cultures outside the Anglo-Saxon realm in this country.
-Immediately deport any non-citizen.
-Close off immigration, entirely.
-Impose a singular definition of marriage..and that being a man and women..preferably of the same race.
-Remove any laws regarding the ownership of firearms.
-Hold a foreign policy that essentially recognizes that every other nation should be subservient to the United States. The US should be feared..not respected.
-That the rich are wealthy because divinity made it so. They should rule the nation as well.
-The government in general should only be responsible for keeping and maintaining the military..as well as upholding Christian Anglo Saxon culture.
-That the United States is a Conferacy of States. States hold supremacy over the Federal government.
-Eliminate or curtail the right to vote.
-Eliminate all public education.
-Eliminate Science.
-Eliminate all art that does not glorify Christianity.
-Make each and every crime subject to life imprisonment or execution.
-Promote legislation that squelches any speech that does not fit the agenda of Social Conservativism.
-Taxes are evil and ungodly.

The Agenda of Corporatists seem to be:
-The government exists to protect the interests of corporate entities.
-Revenue should be derived in large part through government contracts, loans, tax breaks and give backs.
-Regulation of any sort is unprofitable and should never be imposed.
-Risk is to be managed by the tax payer. Profit is private.
-Voting is counter productive to the Plutocracy..and should be curtailed.
-Unions should be completely eliminated. No laws regarding employment, employee safety, and wages should be implemented.
-The Federal Bank serves no useful purpose. It should be the Financial and banking industry that controls the value of currency and interest rates.
-Profit should be the sole domain of executives, with some going to shareholders..who can be screwed at any time.
-It should be the realm of corporations to determine whether or not their products are safe. Buyer beware.
-The government exists essentially as an extention of the Corporatists.
-The military-industrial complex is a wonderful source of revenue and wars should be encouraged.

And when you combine the to..or mix and match..it's easy to understand the Conservatives and today's Republican party.

For Republicans to win in the next election, they are going have to serve both these factions which will benefit the Democrats.

 

[dblack]

Then you point was what?

That the Constitution does, in spirit and in text, limit the federal government and protect the independence of the states. The history of the development of the document bears this out as well.

But hey, I'm really not interested in trying to convince you. Mostly in comes down to reading comprehension. If you're one of those who reads a modifying clause on the power to tax as 'broad implied power' to do whatever the state decrees to be in the interests of our 'welfare', then there's really not much point in getting into it.

 

[bripat9643]

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth

The 2 main branches of the Democrat Party are the Marxists.

You mean the Stalinists and the Maoists.

 

[bripat9643]

as sad as it is, thats pretty accurate.

It's about as accurate as Anthony Wiener's responses to questions about his sexting.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This doesn’t mean what many understand it to mean.

That the Constitution does, in spirit and in text, limit the federal government and protect the independence of the states. The history of the development of the document bears this out as well.

Supreme Court case law does not, however.

 

[dblack]

That the Constitution does, in spirit and in text, limit the federal government and protect the independence of the states. The history of the development of the document bears this out as well.

Supreme Court case law does not, however.

Sad, but true.

 

[Steelplate]

Take a gander at the Constitution.

Ok.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So what do you want? An unlimited number of amendments to the Constitution that takes care of the bullshit that Wall Street and it's minion have been pervading upon us?

That will make the Constitution very bulky and easily manipulated by people with many high priced lawyers at their disposal to serve their interests.... which in effect, makes the Constitution obsolete and terminally pliable to those with the most CAPITAL.

 

[Sallow]

Then you point was what?

That the Constitution does, in spirit and in text, limit the federal government and protect the independence of the states. The history of the development of the document bears this out as well.

But hey, I'm really not interested in trying to convince you. Mostly in comes down to reading comprehension. If you're one of those who reads a modifying clause on the power to tax as 'broad implied power' to do whatever the state decrees to be in the interests of our 'welfare', then there's really not much point in getting into it.

No it doesn't. Not in the way you think. And your dismissive tone basically means your "conviction" in this area is all that strong.

What the Constitution DOES do is limit the power of the government over the INDIVIDUAL. That's something that at almost every term the conservatives are trying to destroy. From the implicit right to privacy to the explicit right to be safe from torture..conservatives weaken and tug out those rights.

It's really something to behold.