Cheap Labor Conservatives Throughout US History

[Unkotare]

After 1965 Democrats lost the south and Republicans became the White Man's Party.

You'll have to find a new fairy tale, 'cause that one has been debunked a thousand times. I know that might involve that 'thinking' that you liberals find so troublesome, but...

 

[georgephillip]

You failed to explain how you made the determination. You OP also failed to explain it. It simply claimed that a list of accusations were examples of "cheap-labor conservatism."

Can you find one among the 60 examples that you would object to?

 

[georgephillip]

You'll have to find a new fairy tale, 'cause that one has been debunked a thousand times. I know that might involve that 'thinking' that you liberals find so troublesome, but...

Think about that.

 

[Unkotare]

Think about that.

You're either being stupid or dishonest. The democrat party hasn't changed its fundamental outlook.

- Treat people as 'categories,' not individuals
- Use people for the ends of the state, not the other way around
- Oppress, imprison, enslave as 'necessary'
- When in doubt, blame America first
- etc, etc, etc

 

[Bfgrn]

So you're going to try to tell us we really were a socialist state all along? Capitalism made us number one, like no other nation ever in the history of the world. Many liberals have done very well with our system. The further left we go, the worse the economy gets and liberals think more of the same is the solution. Go figure.

When we go further right the US economy suffers. Examples Harding Coolidge Hoover got the great depression. bushcheney = the crash of 2008, which Obama is slowly getting us out of. Tariffs as per Hamilton helped this country become a number one world power, not the cheap labor free trade.

You are working your obama toy pretty hard. Give it a rest. The Dims helped quite a lot with the spending but you wouldn't know it to listen to them today. Quite a few factors were involved but you'd need your guardian to walk it through with you. obama, like other libs made the same mistake by thinking he could spend our way into prosperity.

Only you far left hacks believe it, America woke up to it and obviously doesn't agree that we are doing better due to government confiscation of wealth and spending.

FALSE...When liberals were in power (New Deal through the Great Society) they PAID FOR what they spent through tax revenue...thus the conservative demeaning label "tax and spend liberals"...

Ronald Reagan changed all that.

False. We had a deficit prior to his administration and the Dims refused to cut any spending. Carter gutted the military, which is how libs typically reduce spending and Reagan did ramp it back up at great expense, but history has proven it to be money well spent. But blaming Reagan for obama's spending is just retarded.

Carter INCREASED military spending.

CARTER REVISITED

Popularly known as one of our weakest and unsuccessful Presidents- although the “perception” may be true- much of it is a result of myths- and incorrect information- whereas- Ronald Reagan’s overall great image in American politics- is also due to many myths.

Jimmy Carter did not entangle America in foreign conflicts- Jimmy Carter did not expand our debt significantly (1.6-2.7%)- Jimmy Carter reduced the poverty rate (1976-80 poverty rate fell several points), Jimmy Carter was not a big tax and spend President.

Another popular myth is what Jimmy Carter did to the military- i.e. created a hollow force, reduced spending, etc. – this is a myth. Carter did not engage in some massive reduction in military spending, the budget was on a rapid decline because of the end of the Vietnam War, but into his second year- he (Carter) began a military buildup in spending and to address the “hollow force” issues which was a result of the draw down related directly to the ending of the Vietnam War.

After Carter’s second year in office military spending was boosted by 5% on an upward trajectory- continued by Reagan. During the Carter years- defense spending increased from 4.7% of GDP to 5.2% of GDP- therefore- it was pure myth that during the Carter years the military was “hollowed out” or cut is simply not true. Indeed “some” cut were being made as a result of winding up the Vietnam War and it was Carter who initiated programs to rectify this situation by creating new platforms, commission new weapons, and a surge in building “LIFT” capability (in later years this gave our military global reach). Reagan continued and expanded upon Carter’s and Secretary of Defense Brown’s policies.

I am personally a great fan of Ronald Reagan and remember his Presidency well, but in the study of history- we use time and greater time as an analytical tool to be able to reflect on events more clearly, more objectively and with less emotion- and probably- with many more facts than when events occurred.

In this case, it’s time to revise history just a bit- to realize that Carter got a bad rap for many things which were simply not true about him- and Reagan gained a lot of adulation for things which were not true about him also- i.e. he created enormous deficits by cutting taxes and raising defense spending and the increased tax base did not yield as much revenue as predicted- hence large deficits.

For example, under Carter, the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP was 1.6%-2.7% yet under Reagan, our deficits expanded from 2.6% to 4.0% to 6.0% hovering for two years at 5.1% before reducing to 3.2% during his final year. From those numbers- clearly Carter is the fiscal conservative whereas Reagan is the one expanding government, spending, and debt levels.

 

[georgephillip]

Republicans aren't afraid of change...

This thread is about how Conservatives fear change, not Republicans or Democrats.
CONSERVATIVES:
"Opposed freedom of speech for Southern opponents of slavery. It seems the institution of slavery became so sacred, the conservative southern planters made it a crime to speak out against it. Before the 14th amendment, freedom of speech was not required of the states.

1. Declared – contrary to Jefferson’s dictum that 'all men are created equal' – that 'the black man has no rights the white man is bound to respect'. This was the holding of Dred Scott v. Sandford, perhaps the single worst opinion in the history of the US Supreme Court.
2. Supported destruction of the union rather than allow Congress to so much as restrict slavery to places where it already existed.
3. Opposed the earliest civil rights legislation to enforce the 14th and 15th amendments."

A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

 

[Iceweasel]

So you're going to try to tell us we really were a socialist state all along? Capitalism made us number one, like no other nation ever in the history of the world. Many liberals have done very well with our system. The further left we go, the worse the economy gets and liberals think more of the same is the solution. Go figure.

When we go further right the US economy suffers. Examples Harding Coolidge Hoover got the great depression. bushcheney = the crash of 2008, which Obama is slowly getting us out of. Tariffs as per Hamilton helped this country become a number one world power, not the cheap labor free trade.

You are working your obama toy pretty hard. Give it a rest. The Dims helped quite a lot with the spending but you wouldn't know it to listen to them today. Quite a few factors were involved but you'd need your guardian to walk it through with you. obama, like other libs made the same mistake by thinking he could spend our way into prosperity.

Only you far left hacks believe it, America woke up to it and obviously doesn't agree that we are doing better due to government confiscation of wealth and spending.

FALSE...When liberals were in power (New Deal through the Great Society) they PAID FOR what they spent through tax revenue...thus the conservative demeaning label "tax and spend liberals"...

Ronald Reagan changed all that.

False. We had a deficit prior to his administration and the Dims refused to cut any spending. Carter gutted the military, which is how libs typically reduce spending and Reagan did ramp it back up at great expense, but history has proven it to be money well spent. But blaming Reagan for obama's spending is just retarded.

Carter INCREASED military spending.

CARTER REVISITED

Popularly known as one of our weakest and unsuccessful Presidents- although the “perception” may be true- much of it is a result of myths- and incorrect information- whereas- Ronald Reagan’s overall great image in American politics- is also due to many myths.

Jimmy Carter did not entangle America in foreign conflicts- Jimmy Carter did not expand our debt significantly (1.6-2.7%)- Jimmy Carter reduced the poverty rate (1976-80 poverty rate fell several points), Jimmy Carter was not a big tax and spend President.

Another popular myth is what Jimmy Carter did to the military- i.e. created a hollow force, reduced spending, etc. – this is a myth. Carter did not engage in some massive reduction in military spending, the budget was on a rapid decline because of the end of the Vietnam War, but into his second year- he (Carter) began a military buildup in spending and to address the “hollow force” issues which was a result of the draw down related directly to the ending of the Vietnam War.

After Carter’s second year in office military spending was boosted by 5% on an upward trajectory- continued by Reagan. During the Carter years- defense spending increased from 4.7% of GDP to 5.2% of GDP- therefore- it was pure myth that during the Carter years the military was “hollowed out” or cut is simply not true. Indeed “some” cut were being made as a result of winding up the Vietnam War and it was Carter who initiated programs to rectify this situation by creating new platforms, commission new weapons, and a surge in building “LIFT” capability (in later years this gave our military global reach). Reagan continued and expanded upon Carter’s and Secretary of Defense Brown’s policies.

I am personally a great fan of Ronald Reagan and remember his Presidency well, but in the study of history- we use time and greater time as an analytical tool to be able to reflect on events more clearly, more objectively and with less emotion- and probably- with many more facts than when events occurred.

In this case, it’s time to revise history just a bit- to realize that Carter got a bad rap for many things which were simply not true about him- and Reagan gained a lot of adulation for things which were not true about him also- i.e. he created enormous deficits by cutting taxes and raising defense spending and the increased tax base did not yield as much revenue as predicted- hence large deficits.

For example, under Carter, the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP was 1.6%-2.7% yet under Reagan, our deficits expanded from 2.6% to 4.0% to 6.0% hovering for two years at 5.1% before reducing to 3.2% during his final year. From those numbers- clearly Carter is the fiscal conservative whereas Reagan is the one expanding government, spending, and debt levels.

Got something besides an unsourced op-ed?

 

[georgephillip]

You're either being stupid or dishonest. The democrat party hasn't changed its fundamental outlook

This thread deals with CONSERVATIVES, not Republicans or Democrats. Why are you deflecting?
CONSERVATIVES:
"Supported the establishment of 'Jim Crow' in the south.

1. Opposed state laws guaranteeing minimum wages and restricting working hours for industrial workers.
2. Opposed the right to vote for women.
3. Supported prohibition.
4. Opposed the League of Nations – and continue to oppose US participation in the United Nations."

A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

 

[rdean]

What is it about progress that scares conservatives the most?

They don't have what it takes.

 

[Bfgrn]

When we go further right the US economy suffers. Examples Harding Coolidge Hoover got the great depression. bushcheney = the crash of 2008, which Obama is slowly getting us out of. Tariffs as per Hamilton helped this country become a number one world power, not the cheap labor free trade.

You are working your obama toy pretty hard. Give it a rest. The Dims helped quite a lot with the spending but you wouldn't know it to listen to them today. Quite a few factors were involved but you'd need your guardian to walk it through with you. obama, like other libs made the same mistake by thinking he could spend our way into prosperity.

Only you far left hacks believe it, America woke up to it and obviously doesn't agree that we are doing better due to government confiscation of wealth and spending.

FALSE...When liberals were in power (New Deal through the Great Society) they PAID FOR what they spent through tax revenue...thus the conservative demeaning label "tax and spend liberals"...

Ronald Reagan changed all that.

False. We had a deficit prior to his administration and the Dims refused to cut any spending. Carter gutted the military, which is how libs typically reduce spending and Reagan did ramp it back up at great expense, but history has proven it to be money well spent. But blaming Reagan for obama's spending is just retarded.

Carter INCREASED military spending.

CARTER REVISITED

Popularly known as one of our weakest and unsuccessful Presidents- although the “perception” may be true- much of it is a result of myths- and incorrect information- whereas- Ronald Reagan’s overall great image in American politics- is also due to many myths.

Jimmy Carter did not entangle America in foreign conflicts- Jimmy Carter did not expand our debt significantly (1.6-2.7%)- Jimmy Carter reduced the poverty rate (1976-80 poverty rate fell several points), Jimmy Carter was not a big tax and spend President.

Another popular myth is what Jimmy Carter did to the military- i.e. created a hollow force, reduced spending, etc. – this is a myth. Carter did not engage in some massive reduction in military spending, the budget was on a rapid decline because of the end of the Vietnam War, but into his second year- he (Carter) began a military buildup in spending and to address the “hollow force” issues which was a result of the draw down related directly to the ending of the Vietnam War.

After Carter’s second year in office military spending was boosted by 5% on an upward trajectory- continued by Reagan. During the Carter years- defense spending increased from 4.7% of GDP to 5.2% of GDP- therefore- it was pure myth that during the Carter years the military was “hollowed out” or cut is simply not true. Indeed “some” cut were being made as a result of winding up the Vietnam War and it was Carter who initiated programs to rectify this situation by creating new platforms, commission new weapons, and a surge in building “LIFT” capability (in later years this gave our military global reach). Reagan continued and expanded upon Carter’s and Secretary of Defense Brown’s policies.

I am personally a great fan of Ronald Reagan and remember his Presidency well, but in the study of history- we use time and greater time as an analytical tool to be able to reflect on events more clearly, more objectively and with less emotion- and probably- with many more facts than when events occurred.

In this case, it’s time to revise history just a bit- to realize that Carter got a bad rap for many things which were simply not true about him- and Reagan gained a lot of adulation for things which were not true about him also- i.e. he created enormous deficits by cutting taxes and raising defense spending and the increased tax base did not yield as much revenue as predicted- hence large deficits.

For example, under Carter, the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP was 1.6%-2.7% yet under Reagan, our deficits expanded from 2.6% to 4.0% to 6.0% hovering for two years at 5.1% before reducing to 3.2% during his final year. From those numbers- clearly Carter is the fiscal conservative whereas Reagan is the one expanding government, spending, and debt levels.

Got something besides an unsourced op-ed?

Translation...it doesn't mesh with your dogma...

Maybe you just don't know how to spell...Carter is spelled C-A-R-T-E-R, not N-I-X-O-N or F-O-R-D...

Here are the FACTS:

Historical Tables

Table 15.4—TOTAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES BY MAJOR CATEGORY OF EXPENDITURE: 1948–2013
(in billions of dollars)

Fiscal Year - Defense and International

1977 103.6 - Ford
1978 112.0 - Carter
1979 123.8 - Carter
1980 146.7 - Carter
1981 170.6 - Carter
1982 197.6 - Reagan

 

[Iceweasel]

Translation...it doesn't mesh with your dogma...

Maybe you just don't know how to spell...Carter is spelled C-A-R-T-E-R, not N-I-X-O-N or F-O-R-D...

Here are the FACTS:
Table 15.4—TOTAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES BY MAJOR CATEGORY OF EXPENDITURE: 1948–2013
(in billions of dollars)

Fiscal Year - Defense and International

1977 103.6 - Ford
1978 112.0 - Carter
1979 123.8 - Carter
1980 146.7 - Carter
1981 170.6 - Carter
1982 197.6 - Reagan

Translation = op-ed pieces are not source material. How can you not know? You also don't seem to know that spending is not the sole function of the executive branch. You are simply cherry picking to suit YOUR agenda.

 

[Unkotare]

You're either being stupid or dishonest. The democrat party hasn't changed its fundamental outlook

This thread deals with CONSERVATIVES, not Republicans or Democrats. Why are you deflecting?

YOU are the one attempting to deflect from the shame and filth that was and is the democrat party.

 

[georgephillip]

YOU are the one attempting to deflect from the shame and filth that was and is the democrat party.

You should start a thread on the shame and filth of the Democrat Party; this one's about CONSERVATIVES:
"Cheap-labor conservatives have gotten into the habit of wrapping themselves in the flag, quoting Jefferson, and holding themselves out as defenders of 'American values'.

"In fact, from the very beginning, cheap-labor forces have opposed and obstructed realization of Jefferson’s dream of equality, democracy and social justice. Here is a short list of examples of cheap-labor conservatives obstructing of those values."

A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

 

[Unkotare]

YOU are the one attempting to deflect from the shame and filth that was and is the democrat party.

You should start a thread on the shame and filth of the Democrat Party

= Dodge + Whine

 

[georgephillip]

= Dodge + Whine

^What cheap-labor conservatives do best.
"The cheap-labor conservatives:

1. Supported George III in the American Revolution. Fully a third of the population of the colonies didn’t even want independence.
   
   
   
2. Supported protection for the institution of slavery in the Constitutional convention. This included the bizarre insistence that slaves be counted in determining slave state representation in Congress. Slaves were people according to conservative planters, but only for purposes of counting them. Those same interests also prevented regulation of the importation of slaves prior to 1808.
3. Opposed tariffs to protect American manufacturing. Reactionary southern planters failed to grasp the need to develop our own industrial base. They preferred to operate a slave labor driven cash crop economy for the simple reason that they – the wealthy planters that is – profited from economic underdevelopment."

A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

 

[bripat9643]

You're either being stupid or dishonest. The democrat party hasn't changed its fundamental outlook

This thread deals with CONSERVATIVES, not Republicans or Democrats. Why are you deflecting?
CONSERVATIVES:
"Supported the establishment of 'Jim Crow' in the south.

1. Opposed state laws guaranteeing minimum wages and restricting working hours for industrial workers.
2. Opposed the right to vote for women.
3. Supported prohibition.
4. Opposed the League of Nations – and continue to oppose US participation in the United Nations."

A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

You'd have a hard time proving that support for any of those positions was "conservative."

 

[Wyatt earp]

Back in the day, George 3 defenders would have been liberals or progressives.

Surely, you're not that confused
"They (Loyalists) felt that being a part of the British Empire was crucial in terms of commerce and their business operations."
Loyalist American Revolution - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Sounds like a modern liberal.

The democrat party. You can't spin and parse your party's filth away, and trying to rehash a false narrative that has been debunked a thousand times here won't work either. It is fundamentally what it has always been.

Except it's not.
After 1965 Democrats lost the south and Republicans became the White Man's Party. Conservatives in both factions:
"Opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

1. Opposed the Civil Rights of 1964.
2. Opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
3. Opposed Medicare"

Conservatives appear so frightened by change they are willing to die for any status quo, no matter how oppressive.
A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

You do know Jimmy won the south right?

 

[georgephillip]

You'd have a hard time proving that support for any of those positions was "conservative."

Pick one.
A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress Conceptual Guerilla s Strategy And Tactics

 

[georgephillip]

You do know Jimmy won the south right?

Was Jimmy a cheap labor conservative?

 

[Wyatt earp]

What does that have to do with your post on democrats switching? I just owned you on your ignorance