Where have all the Conservatives Gone?

[sangha]

This cartoon answers the OP's question

 

[uscitizen]

Oh, I don't mean just people who call themselves conservatives; I mean the people who call themselves the real conservatives, the proudly hardcore

small government conservatives, the ones

1. who think the EPA, and FEMA, and the Department of Energy (for starters) are unconstitutional.

2. who think that if the Constitution doesn't say the government can do it, then the government can't do it.

3. who think the states can take of themselves.

4. who think the federal government over-regulates corporations.

Where did these folks disappear to? Is there an undisclosed location that all the small government laissez-faire states rightsers flee to when real life makes their agenda look ridiculous?

Seems the only so-called conservatives around for the moment are ones who blame the federal government for not doing enough with the oil spill, who blame the federal government for not sufficiently regulating the oil industry, who are attacking the president for not using the power and money of big central government to take care of the states affected.

Seems the only conservatives around for the moment are the ones that the self-proclaimed 'real' conservatives used to hold up as examples of what is wrong with the GOP and the right...

...although some of them bear a striking similarity to the 'real' conservatives. Sometimes it appears as if they are actually the same persons, in disguise. Could that be possible??

Come out come out wherever you are.

They never were here anyway.
So how could they go anywhere?

Seriously? So I imagined all those posts about enumerated powers in the Constitution. So there are no conservatives who've ever thought corporations needed less regulation? Seriously?

That's my point, btw. The mysterious disappearance.

They were just political parrots. Their puppet masters are confused and mostly silent right now so they are too.
They never were really conservatives.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Since you're just as ignorant as any conservative (ie "neo-cons" are not liberals, they are rightwingers. Cheney is a neo-con. Rumsfeld is a neo-con. You are a moron) why shouldn't we consider you a conservative?

Wrong again dumb ass....neo-cons are in fact liberals....look it up.

How great is this!? Cheney and the rest of the pro-Iraq war right are now, through the magic of revisionism,

LIBERALS!!!

...this would make Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, GW Bush, for starters, all LIBERALS now!!!

Add to the list!

I just love it when ignoramus's like you throw around terms you read on the DailyKOS blogs to make yourselves look politically hip and have no fucking clue as to there meaning or history. Please continue to make a complete ass out of yourself....it's quite entertaining.

 

[uscitizen]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

 

[Ragnar]

 

[blu]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

bush was elected by the GOP which is currently liberal

 

[PatekPhilippe]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

Perhaps in some views...Bush wasn't a neo-con.

Read the link.
Neoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sangha]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

bush was elected by the GOP which is currently liberal

 

[uscitizen]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

bush was elected by the GOP which is currently liberal

Back to my other post which says there never were really any conservatives in any noticible numbers in the first place.

 

[blu]

This cartoon answers the OP's question

the whole thing is a joke. if true conservative values were enforced, one of the main ones being property rights, BP would currently being paying each and every person who lost their job their normal wages, and would be paying the owners of any land affected by the spill for cleanup as well as lost revenue due to the flood. Its too bad the government thinks it should be the god of all land and strips owners of their right to protect their own land and punish those who ruin it.

Its the same idea as companies who polutte the air all day and pay a whopping dollar or two a day to the government to do it through lax laws and lobbying. If the government would give land rights back to people and owners these business would be gone already or be forced to use clean techonologies

you don't need wackos blowing up SUVs and slashing tires to get enviromental safety, the proper and most effective way to do it is already built into the foundation of the country

 

[blu]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

bush was elected by the GOP which is currently liberal

Back to my other post which says there never were really any conservatives in any noticible numbers in the first place.

they were highly disenfranchised due to bush's 180 once he was elected in 2000. They are back now though and have already knocked some people out of office and november isn't even here yet

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

bush was elected by the GOP which is currently liberal

Back to my other post which says there never were really any conservatives in any noticible numbers in the first place.

Yeah, okay. Suggestion: Stop snacking on the urinal cakes... it is DEFINATELY affecting your judgement.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

This cartoon answers the OP's question

the whole thing is a joke. if true conservative values were enforced, one of the main ones being property rights, BP would currently being paying each and every person who lost their job their normal wages, and would be paying the owners of any land affected by the spill for cleanup as well as lost revenue due to the flood. Its too bad the government thinks it should be the god of all land and strips owners of their right to protect their own land and punish those who ruin it.

Its the same idea as companies who polutte the air all day and pay a whopping dollar or two a day to the government to do it through lax laws and lobbying. If the government would give land rights back to people and owners these business would be gone already or be forced to use clean techonologies

you don't need wackos blowing up SUVs and slashing tires to get enviromental safety, the proper and most effective way to do it is already built into the foundation of the country

Environmental safety is built into the foundation of the country? WTF??? Are you high?

 

[sealybobo]

If righties can't even admit they were wrong when they said Drill Baby Drill, or if they can't even admit that Bush and the GOP controlled government from 2000-2006 was a catastrophe, or that the Iraq war was a mistake, then why bother talking to them?

 

[blu]

This cartoon answers the OP's question

the whole thing is a joke. if true conservative values were enforced, one of the main ones being property rights, BP would currently being paying each and every person who lost their job their normal wages, and would be paying the owners of any land affected by the spill for cleanup as well as lost revenue due to the flood. Its too bad the government thinks it should be the god of all land and strips owners of their right to protect their own land and punish those who ruin it.

Its the same idea as companies who polutte the air all day and pay a whopping dollar or two a day to the government to do it through lax laws and lobbying. If the government would give land rights back to people and owners these business would be gone already or be forced to use clean techonologies

you don't need wackos blowing up SUVs and slashing tires to get enviromental safety, the proper and most effective way to do it is already built into the foundation of the country

Environmental safety is built into the foundation of the country? WTF??? Are you high?

STRICT property rights, rights of the property OWNER, were built into this country. Before the overbearing government decided it could make environmental regulations, land owners had full control of their property and full ability to punish and sue the person(s)/business that negatively affected their land. In the case of BP this would mean not only would BP be paying everyone business's employee who depends on the gulf for seafood and the rest, but they would also be paying each person who owned a piece of land affected by the spill. This payment would have started day 1 after teh spill and would not cease until BP had completely cleared its mess and fully restitued every person affected. the federal government would do its main and constitutional job which is protect its citizens , meaning in this case, ensuring that BP paid and paid properly, and if they didn't jail everyone from the top of BP down until they caught up with the payments.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

If righties can't even admit they were wrong when they said Drill Baby Drill, or if they can't even admit that Bush and the GOP controlled government from 2000-2006 was a catastrophe, or that the Iraq war was a mistake, then why bother talking to them?

and your dumb ass wonder's why your rep is at zero.....

 

[blu]

If righties can't even admit they were wrong when they said Drill Baby Drill, or if they can't even admit that Bush and the GOP controlled government from 2000-2006 was a catastrophe, or that the Iraq war was a mistake, then why bother talking to them?

people still want drilling and we need it until the big oil lobbyists are burned at the stake and a replacment energy comes. What we don't need is environmental wackos forcing us to drill miles deep instead of a hundred feet, making eventual spills and pipe breaks impossible to clean uip instead of being a one day affair

 

[AquaAthena]

I and others like me never went anywhere....Just most of us shun the term "conservative" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean anymore) since the leftist neocon turds hijacked the handle.

Next silly question?

Well, it seems that the terms have lost a bit of their meaning, as you guys are using them is ways that render them indeterminate.


How about we expand the idea beyond this country, and define the sides sans Constitution.
There is a world view that defines the sides, and one could apply the parameters the Dr. Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict of Visions," an attempt to explore the philosophy of historical conservatism and liberalism. Conservatism has a tradition of operating by a vision of humans that he calls 'constrained.' Some characteristics of this view are:

(1) Humans have generally selfish natures.
(2) Human reason, while valuable, is quite limited.
(3) Because of this, society grows by evolution, not central deliberate planning.
(4) Social decisions generally involve not 'solutions' but 'trade-offs' (how much good for how much downside?)
(5) Procedural fairness, rather than results-based fairness, is the key to a just society.

Liberal tradition operates on a vision of humankind that is 'unconstrained.' Features include:

(1)Human selfishness is a quality that can be overcome by reason and education.
(2) Human reason, when used properly, can trump human impulses, emotions, and feelings.
(3)The planned society is best. Non-planned societies = chaos.
(4) While policy trade-offs might be a good short term solution, reason can discover true solutions that are equitable to all.
(5)Procedural fairness is not fair so long as disperate outcomes result.

According to Sowell, neither is totally correct, and it is up to the individual to choose, wisely, one would hope, the best explantion and pathway for humanity.

A Conflict of Visions is a great book. I am enjoying it . Sowell wirtes: "Where logic is more expansively defined and consequently more widely distributed, as in the constrained vision, intellectuals have no commanding advantage over the common man."

Sowell often quotes economists representing both visions and one I admire is the notable economist Friedrich Hayek who among other logic, states: Compared with the totality of knowledge which is continually utilized in the evolution of a dynamic civilization, the difference between the knowledge that the wisest and that which the most ignorant individual [lack of knowledge] can deliberately employ, is comparatively insignificant."


I conclude that the person with practical and common sense,[ as defined by me] is the one whose voice must not go unheard or without notice.

 

[xsited1]

Where have all the Conservatives Gone?

Conservatives are a dying breed after the Bush years. They were pushed so far underground that leftwing extremists like Obama, Pelosi and Reid were able to rise to power. But the fact that the current 1-party rule we have in the US is screwing up so profoundly should revive them a bit. Let's just hope the neocons don't take over the Republican Party again, otherwise America will surely go bankrupt. (It's probably already too late.)

 

[Oddball]

If Neo's are in fact liberals then why was Bush elected twice by "conservatives"?

Because he wasn't elected by so-called "conservatives"...He was elected, more or less, by the same dupes who voted for "hope and change".