What is a conservative?

[ThinkCritically]

ok....now that that has been settled...

Another interesting aspect of the political "conservative" is that they tend to live outside of major cities. This goes for Red and Blue states alike. I'm not exactly sure were I'm going with that, but it is a fact that I find interesting.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

I wish the "conservatives" would just change their name to "corporatists" and be done with it, because that is exactly what they are.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Oral sex is not sodomy. That is not what the Texas statute outlawed.
Missionary position is not called that because "some religions" (name one) outlaw anything else. It is called that because natives in other countries saw missionaries practicing it.

sod·om·y   [sod-uh-mee]
noun
1.
anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.
2.
copulation with a member of the same sex.
3.
bestiality (def. 4).

OK, apparently teh Texas statute prohibited anal and oral sex between members of the same sex.

So what? The Supremes decided that consensual sex, in the privacy of the home, is a right protected by the Tenth Amendment. Why does this piss you off?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.

Wait, let me add one:

Invade, destroy and occupy countries that annoy you (as long as they can't fight back). This is our planet and everyone must do things our way. Fill American body bags, destroy American military lives and families, waste trillions. Then tell us how you support the troops.

No charge for that one.

.

That does explain Libya, doesn't it.

By the way, thanks for caring enough about the question to provide a well reasoned and thoughtful answer.

I disagreed with Obama's approach to Libya. Since I have no sheep-like allegiance to either ridiculous party, I'm more than happy to criticize Obama when I disagree with him, which is often. If it turns out that we're attempting some kind of nation-building in Libya (especially if our troops in are in any kind of danger whatsoever - I actually DO care about them), no one will be louder in disagreement than me.

Also, if the phrases "Invade, destroy and occupy countries that annoy you (as long as they can't fight back). This is our planet and everyone must do things our way. Fill American body bags, destroy American military lives and families, waste trillions. Then tell us how you support the troops" mean nothing to you, if that's all okay with you, then we'll just have to disagree. There's plenty in there that I would think most people would consider a negative.

To your point, while I disagreed with Obama's sticking our nose into Libya's business, I don't recall us invading, occupying and blowing the crap out of that country. Nor do I remember seeing American body bags or multi-hundred billion dollar price tags as a result of Obama's actions. The next time I'm in an airport - which will actually be in about 4 hours - and I see a soldier with artificial legs being pushed in his wheelchair down the corridor by his young son, I won't be wondering if that happened in Libya.

Since you appear to be equating Libya with Iraq & Afghanistan, perhaps you can provide contrary evidence. My guess is that you can't.

.

If you think that the phrase "Invade, destroy and occupy countries that annoy you (as long as they can't fight back). This is our planet and everyone must do things our way. Fill American body bags, destroy American military lives and families, waste trillions. Then tell us how you support the troops" doesn't apply to Obama you haven't been paying attention.

We attacked Libya, Pakistan, Syrian, Egypt, Iran, Liberia, and even Honduras. Just because we did not launch a massive amphibious assault does not mean we did not invade them, it just means that Obama lied about what was happening. Obama's aggressive military doctrine is far worse than anything we have seen in the last 236 years from an American president. You might want to pretend to yourself that you are not giving him sheep like allegiance, but the rest of us can see you following him just as faithfully as anyone else.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Barry Goldwater wasn't a conservative?
And I didnt know there was a right to sodomy. Learn something new every day.

Do you?

Backing away from the practical political definitions of conservative and liberal as attached to today's major parties, and looking beyond specific policy or ideological concerns, there are traits that distinguish the two mindsets.

Conservatives (outside of intellectuals like Goldwater and Buckley) generally don't 'learn something new everyday'. In fact, they tend to treat that attitude with a good deal of caution - even derision and scorn. As a personality style a conservative is defined as much by a resistance to change as liberals are defined by an eagerness to try something new. That's why "Hope and Change" is inspiring to liberals, but sounds silly and potentially dangerous to conservatives.

That said, neither major party today is predominantly liberal or conservative. They are mostly authoritarian and have evolved the traits that make political parties strong and persistent - primarily those that enhance and secure their power. In this they are essentially the same. They simply target different demographics and use different sales pitches. When you look at how they govern, Democrats spend quite a lot of time 'conserving' the status quo, and Republicans are quite comfortable with radical change when it expands their power and influence.

Strange how a person that the "intellectual liberals" would label a far right wing radical conservative is perpetuating stereotypes. You should stop using broad brushes so freely, every conservative I respect is open to new ideas, just like every liberal I respect is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A text-book conservative is someone who resists change.

Over time the meaning of conservative has morphed to someone who believes in smaller government, but I think it's mostly someone who believes in the original intent of the framers of the constitution.

Also to me a conservative is someone who believes less government means less entitlements. Stand on your own feet when you can, not taking handouts from the government because it's available. It's a mindset that believes the government doesn't know best. The exact opposite of progressives. More freedom instead of more dependency.

All of the superfluous BS about hating women or hating blacks or gays is simply an invention of the left. We were minding our own business and all of the sudden the left starts making accusations because they want more dependency, more control, less freedom. They have to control us in order for us to do what they want us.....which is basically willingly give them our money. They not only want our money but they want us to like it. Never complain about it.

Why does the left need so much money?

Buying votes is expensive.

And with Reagan conservatives became were much supporters of the US being a police force for the world.

Obama is a Reagan conservative by your definition.

 

[ThinkCritically]

So what? The Supremes decided that consensual sex, in the privacy of the home, is a right protected by the Tenth Amendment. Why does this piss you off?

A conservative while possibly disagreeing with certain sexual acts, should not be concerned with the affairs of other people. Its a waist of time for sure. Only control freaks would be in favor of controlling what other people consensually agree to.

So....Is a conservative someone who controls others or who promotes freedom?

 

[KevinWestern]

So what? The Supremes decided that consensual sex, in the privacy of the home, is a right protected by the Tenth Amendment. Why does this piss you off?

A conservative while possibly disagreeing with certain sexual acts, should not be concerned with the affairs of other people. Its a waist of time for sure. Only control freaks would be in favor of controlling what other people consensually agree to.

So....Is a conservative someone who controls others or who promotes freedom?

I don't think the terms "Republican" and conservative (in the sense of smaller, more fiscally conservative government) are synonymous.

I think there are some true conservatives out there today - guys like Ron Paul - who consistently vote to shrink the size of government, reduce wasteful spending, and reduce the "authoritarian" reach of the government. At the same time you have your Republican Party, which generally does not promote a "smaller gov't" despite what they like to advertise. A few case and point links:


1.) NDAA 2012 -
Allows the government to imprison domestic "terrorists" indefinitely without trial. The bill was championed by both Democrats and Republicans:

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2.) HR 347, Anti-Protest Bill
This bill also championed by both Republicans and Democrats, makes it harder for people to exercise their right to free speech.

US Congress Passes Authoritarian Anti-protest Law Bill H.R. 347 | The Total Collapse


3.) Rick Santorum -
#2 GOP Presidential candidate talks about how he wants to "crack down" on porn:

Rick Santorum Promises War On Porn Industry

 

[Valerie]

NOT conservative >>>

Citizens United - Wall Street Journal: City Braces for New Protest

April 29, 2012

New York City police and financial institutions are bracing themselves for a citywide protest Tuesday that many see as a test of whether Occupy Wall Street's strength and popular appeal will reignite after a dormant winter.

Occupy organizers say they plan to "shut the city down" with pickets throughout Midtown and a union-backed march that is expected to draw thousands.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577374252644640684.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

 

[ThinkCritically]

NOT conservative >>>

Citizens United - Wall Street Journal: City Braces for New Protest

April 29, 2012

New York City police and financial institutions are bracing themselves for a citywide protest Tuesday that many see as a test of whether Occupy Wall Street's strength and popular appeal will reignite after a dormant winter.

Occupy organizers say they plan to "shut the city down" with pickets throughout Midtown and a union-backed march that is expected to draw thousands.

City Braces for New Protest - WSJ.com

I would agree yet disagree, they are radical in the sense that they are trying to change what has happened, yet they are conservative in that they want to get rid of a law which is hurting our freedoms. Does a conservative not want to protect our liberties?

 

[whitehall]

Conservative is the political norm. Enough about labels.

 

[Valerie]

NOT conservative >>>

Citizens United - Wall Street Journal: City Braces for New Protest

April 29, 2012

New York City police and financial institutions are bracing themselves for a citywide protest Tuesday that many see as a test of whether Occupy Wall Street's strength and popular appeal will reignite after a dormant winter.

Occupy organizers say they plan to "shut the city down" with pickets throughout Midtown and a union-backed march that is expected to draw thousands.

City Braces for New Protest - WSJ.com

I would agree yet disagree, they are radical in the sense that they are trying to change what has happened, yet they are conservative in that they want to get rid of a law which is hurting our freedoms. Does a conservative not want to protect our liberties?

Of course, who doesn't want to protect our liberties? THE USA has proper legal channels for redress of grievances which do not include closing down cities.

 

[KevinWestern]

NOT conservative >>>

Citizens United - Wall Street Journal: City Braces for New Protest

April 29, 2012

New York City police and financial institutions are bracing themselves for a citywide protest Tuesday that many see as a test of whether Occupy Wall Street's strength and popular appeal will reignite after a dormant winter.

Occupy organizers say they plan to "shut the city down" with pickets throughout Midtown and a union-backed march that is expected to draw thousands.

City Braces for New Protest - WSJ.com

I would agree yet disagree, they are radical in the sense that they are trying to change what has happened, yet they are conservative in that they want to get rid of a law which is hurting our freedoms. Does a conservative not want to protect our liberties?

I think a lot of young people and college kids would be very interested in the idea of "conservatism", and I think this is why Ron Paul has such a strong 20-something support base.

However, the GOP often loses these votes when it supports freedom-stifling social policy, such as not supporting gay marriage, ect. Also, just like the Dems, the GOP tends to be very confrontational and generalizing, which produces unnecessary enemies.

Take OWS for example...

The Republicans should support OWS! All they need to do is explain that one of the ways you can reduce the grip of big business on our country by reducing the size and reach of our government. Often times big business will rig the government so that all of the rules play into their favor, giving the little guys little to no opportunity to compete. If you reduce the size of the government, essentially it reduces the authoritarian power of the giant lobbying corporations.

But instead of making friends, the GOP instead embraces their policy of "demonization".

And the Dems do this of course, as well.

 

[dblack]

I wish the "conservatives" would just change their name to "corporatists" and be done with it, because that is exactly what they are.

But then how would they distinguish themselves from "liberals"?

 

[dblack]

Strange how a person that the "intellectual liberals" would label a far right wing radical conservative is perpetuating stereotypes. You should stop using broad brushes so freely, every conservative I respect is open to new ideas, just like every liberal I respect is.

It is strange, and has as much to do mis-application of the words as anything else. I meant to try to bring things back to the meaning of the words and avoid stereotypes. And that's what the words mean: to be conservative is to avoid unnecessary change, where liberal describes an acceptance of 'progressive' change.

 

[Mr.Nick]

I'm confused as to what conservative is? Its seems to me that it is almost like a Rorschach test. If you are a "conservative" let me know what makes a politician conservative. If you are not a "conservative" feel free to chime in, but keep the hate to a minimum please.

It depends on the object in question... Conservative means to conserve...

Politically in the United States - "conservatives" want to conserve the ideas of the founding fathers, which is the opposite of "progressive" which want to sway away from the founding fathers ideas....

Of course you have conservative religious folk who's emphasis is to conserve religious values and not have them tainted by "new age religious "progress."

I'm a classical liberal (conservative) however, religiously I'm also a Christian conservative.... However, I do believe in the founding fathers ideas so I don't believe government has the right to force anyone to adhere to conservative values, but at the same time the government has no right telling me I can't promote my religion, or practice my religion....

Conservative equates to pretty much nothing more than the conservation of a basic principal and not allowing that principal to be corrupted....

Conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

^^^Pretty much what I just asserted

 

[ThinkCritically]

I think a lot of young people and college kids would be very interested in the idea of "conservatism", and I think this is why Ron Paul has such a strong 20-something support base.

However, the GOP often loses these votes when it supports freedom-stifling social policy, such as not supporting gay marriage, ect. Also, just like the Dems, the GOP tends to be very confrontational and generalizing, which produces unnecessary enemies.

Take OWS for example...

The Republicans should support OWS! All they need to do is explain that one of the ways you can reduce the grip of big business on our country by reducing the size and reach of our government. Often times big business will rig the government so that all of the rules play into their favor, giving the little guys little to no opportunity to compete. If you reduce the size of the government, essentially it reduces the authoritarian power of the giant lobbying corporations.

But instead of making friends, the GOP instead embraces their policy of "demonization".

And the Dems do this of course, as well.

It is not conservative to create government backed monopolies. Regulations can be a significant barrier to entry for many entrepreneurs especially poor ones. I'm reminded of the rabbit lady in "Roger and Me".

Of course as you go up the chain, the barriers to entry increase which makes firm entry increasingly only available to those who can afford the entry costs associated with meeting regulation.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Strange how a person that the "intellectual liberals" would label a far right wing radical conservative is perpetuating stereotypes. You should stop using broad brushes so freely, every conservative I respect is open to new ideas, just like every liberal I respect is.

It is strange, and has as much to do mis-application of the words as anything else. I meant to try to bring things back to the meaning of the words and avoid stereotypes. And that's what the words mean: to be conservative is to avoid unnecessary change, where liberal describes an acceptance of 'progressive' change.

Avoiding change does not mean not learning, which is why I called you on what you said.

 

[dblack]

Strange how a person that the "intellectual liberals" would label a far right wing radical conservative is perpetuating stereotypes. You should stop using broad brushes so freely, every conservative I respect is open to new ideas, just like every liberal I respect is.

It is strange, and has as much to do mis-application of the words as anything else. I meant to try to bring things back to the meaning of the words and avoid stereotypes. And that's what the words mean: to be conservative is to avoid unnecessary change, where liberal describes an acceptance of 'progressive' change.

Avoiding change does not mean not learning, which is why I called you on what you said.

Alright. Fair enough. I'll also cop to taking a poke at Rabbi. Can't hardly blame me for that, can ya?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It is strange, and has as much to do mis-application of the words as anything else. I meant to try to bring things back to the meaning of the words and avoid stereotypes. And that's what the words mean: to be conservative is to avoid unnecessary change, where liberal describes an acceptance of 'progressive' change.

Avoiding change does not mean not learning, which is why I called you on what you said.

Alright. Fair enough. I'll also cop to taking a poke at Rabbi. Can't hardly blame me for that, can ya?

Poke at Rabbi, or anyone else, including me, all you want. You just earned the privilege by being able to take pokes yourself.