The American Conservative (Continuing Series)

[JoeB131]

True, but the fishing, and shipping industries brought in a population; LA lies near a fault. Building LA was not that bright either, Miami, and much of the Florida coast, is subject to hurricanes frequently, along with the Keys. Yet, they remain populated.

Yes they do. And when a natural disaster strikes, it isn't really any president's fault, is it?

Incidently, I think that there are some valid criticism of Bush, not the least of which was that he put people in charge of the banking industry who weren't watching the store and he kept drinking the Free Trade Koolaid when it became clear that it was actually hurting our economy.

Iraq and NOLA, not so much on my list of criticism.

 

[Listening]

American conservatives gush over life, they proudly claim they are pro life, imagine them raising ten or fifteen of the little angels on a Walmart worker salary and you've gone too far and introduced reality into their dreamworld. Ask the AC to support life in more than just words, and you are faced with the paradox that is at the core of the American Conservative, they only care when the idea remains an abstraction. Ask the AC to support the children they love so much at conception with early childhood support, or lunch programs, or with education, and you've gone too far. Abstractions then turn to sticks.

Well actuall, not many women are interested in ten or fiftenn. But, I do know people who are raising two or three and doing quite well at it. Some of them even work at Wal-Mart.

The difference is that they have something the left has sought to destroy. An incredible network of people who care about each other and support each other through the viscisitudes of life.

It's called FAMILY.

And no, that isn't an abstract.

You failed again.

 

[occupied]

Conservatism is the quest for a simple world, how bad would that suck?

 

[snakedoc]

Another in a series of Midcan's explications of the American Conservative (AC)

We know the AC repeats the same cliches about government, taxes, markets, the founders, the Constitution, and freedom over and over again, but what makes them tick, what drives their souls to such simplistic worship of empty abstractions? Is it just a self centered bubble mentality that assumes their limited knowledge is all there is to life? Is it too hard for them to step outside this bubble and see the world for what it is? A world more complicated than their simple finger pointing?

Liberals and other commentators miss the point when they laugh at the AC constant repetition of glorious abstractions that never were or when the AC accuses the liberal or the progressive of the very failures that are at the heart of conservative inaction and their worship of words. In these repeated cliches are contained a code of language that allows an easy categorization of life, a simple view that removed the complexity which is in all of life but was once perfect if only for .... it is this piece that contains the crux of the conservative.

So what's on the menu for today but a return to the time of 'Leave it to Beaver' in which June perfectly coiffured with two boys, practiced rhythm, for surely June did not practice birth control, the horror of it. While it is unfair to point out the dream world of 'Beaver,' it does present an interesting historical commentary, imagine yourself at that time in history, unwed and pregnant, or gay, or black...which brings me to today's insight into the American Conservative, their recent obsession with birth control.

American conservatives gush over life, they proudly claim they are pro life, imagine them raising ten or fifteen of the little angels on a Walmart worker salary and you've gone too far and introduced reality into their dreamworld. Ask the AC to support life in more than just words, and you are faced with the paradox that is at the core of the American Conservative, they only care when the idea remains an abstraction. Ask the AC to support the children they love so much at conception with early childhood support, or lunch programs, or with education, and you've gone too far. Abstractions then turn to sticks.

So why is this? The answer is simple, the American conservative is never for doing things, they are always against doing things. What you say? Quite simple, if real equality existed, or fairness existed, or a level playing field existed, the AC would be lost, for it is privilege and power that is at the heart of this empty worship of ideas. Their empty ideas do nothing and everything, for they support the status quo, and it is the status quo the AC loves. It is why a woman's right to healthcare in the form of contraception or even equal pay is taboo. Change challenges the way things are. If you doubt this consider that no one brought up Viagra as healthcare. Men must still be in charge for the conservative.

When Mitt Romney said recently it is their turn, he really meant, go away, go back, that is stay where you belong, for privilege only rests with us, the elite, and fairness for all is not something we believe in. The American conservative believes only in power and privilege and they fight to keep it that way. Again if in doubt consider the years of the Clinton administration and now the Obama administration. Conservatives fail when in power as George W. Bush demonstrated so well, out of power they find their mojo.


http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...es-of-midcans-insights-into-contemporary.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/50859-conservative-beliefs.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/88682-a-conservative-wakes-up.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...lthcare/181931-conservatives-and-empathy.html

Standard talking points nothing to see here.

 

[midcan5]

A few comments before I check if any intelligent replies exist. I have been studying and observing the Conservative for many years. Certain in-laws, republicans, have labeled themselves conservatives, but their beliefs are all over the place. A first assumption was conservatives only exist because liberals exist. In other words they are simply reactionaries. It took a while but my assumption has been confirmed in observation and in practice and noted in a book I started reading this weekend, noted below. Conservatives only exist to react against change, any emancipation, any progress - as I've noted numerous times, no nation was ever founded on conservatism, nor has any conservative once in power accomplished anything that helped all the people of a nation. Let me read the replies now, I will comment when time provides.

"Today's conservative may have made his peace with some emancipation past; others, like labor unions and reproductive freedom, he still contests. But that does not alter the fact that when those emancipation's first arose as a question, whether in the context of revolution or reform, his predecessor was in all likelihood against them. Michael Gerson, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, is one of the few contemporary conservatives who acknowledge the history of conservative opposition to emancipation."
[..]
"I use the words conservative, revolutionary, and counterrevolutionary interchangeable; not all counterrevolutionaries are conservative - Walt Rostow immediately comes to mind - but what all conservatives are, in one way or another, counterrevolutionary. I seat philosophers, statesman, slaveholders, scribblers, Catholics, fascists, evangelicals, businessmen, racists, and hacks at the same table: Hobbes next too Hayek, Burke across from Palin, Nietzsche in between Ayn Rand and Antonin Scalia, with Adams, Calhoun, Oakeshott, Ronald Reagan, Tocqueville, Theodore Roosevelt, Margaret Thatcher, Ernst Junger, Carl Schmidt, Winston Churchill, Phyllis Schlafly, Richard Nixon, Irving Kristol, Francis Fukuyama, and George W. Bush interspersed throughout." Corey Robin in 'The Reactionary Mind'

And check: Boston Review — Corey Robin and David V. Johnson: Contraception and Counterrevolution (The Reactionary Mind, conservatism)

 

[midcan5]

How many times does one have to tell the children on USMB that ad hominem is not a counter argument? If the best you can do is name call, I hope that you're twelve or under, otherwise consider yourself a village idiot.

Note there were no substantive counter arguments.

JoeB131, that's so apologetic I started to cry for poor George W. Bush. Who knew he had serious challenges, I guess maybe he wasn't up to the job? You think.

Your reading of history is interesting as Carter and Clinton may be labeled anywhere on our political spectrum, but the effort to destroy them came from the right, aka conservatives, aka reactionaries - I use all interchangeably.

I do agree none of the democrats have come up to the stature of a FDR or LBJ but corporations (money?) control ideas today and not enough vote or pay attention to outcomes rather than rhetoric. The left in America today is a creation of the right, not the other way around. Power likes power and likes to keep it. Fairness of any kind is taboo to the conservative. Every single progressive ideas is fought tooth and nail. But thanks for the thoughtful reply.

PS I don't pick on 'the Beaver,' I loved that show even though it was unreal as most TV still is. I often wondered if only the people I knew were poor or in trouble until I entered the real world and realized 'the Beaver' was the unreal part.


SniperFire, freedom without context is an empty abstraction, the use of the constitution by the right is meaningless given most of the issues they oppose were not covered by the Constitution, for example gay marriage or reproductive rights.


Mac1958, There is a reality, the so called pudding, and if you were a honest reader of history you'd have to say FDR did great, RR did awful. It is the result that matters not the words. Conservatives have opposed every positive change starting with America's revolution with England. Burke is their hero and example.


Peach, There is no radical left in politics today. For those who think there is one, please provide names and examples of their radicalism.



Mac1958, your friend is interesting and there are a too few around like him. The problem I see with his sort is that while he can tolerate you and your beliefs, his vote, his actual action, will still elect another buffoon of the right, be it a Bush Jr or a Walker or a Ryan and these are the people who hurt Americans. Sometimes it is easy to be tolerant when the person is known, hard when unknown and their ideas challenge you.

As for Sniperfire's reply, consider the evil of her/his name online and you get a sense of the person. Right wingers will not read nor consider your comment - if they did they would not be right wing conservatives.



Listening, So while good jobs are the answer to so many things in your mind, you'd still vote for the party that brought us the great depression and the great recession? That makes no rational sense, or only makes sense for a blind partisan or a .... http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186726-republican-ideology-through-history-7.html#post4251322

As for your second comment when you show me conservatives who protested the slaughter in Iraq during shock and awe, or who support living children who die every fifteen seconds in the world, you'd have a point, till then pro life is simply a moral crutch that requires nothing of the moralist. See this post: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...e-with-a-history-of-trauma-5.html#post4730878

Did I say family was an abstract? I come from a too large family, my mom lived the faith, and have an excellent one, all is well with us. Yikes, I should be a mindless conservative, but I just can't do it.


Occupied, Life is not simple, never was, never will be. Unless you mean this kinda simple? The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer Free, read all about it. http://www.conservativenannystate.org/cnswebbook.pdf

"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." CG A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress | Conceptual Guerilla

 

[JoeB131]

How many times does one have to tell the children on USMB that ad hominem is not a counter argument? If the best you can do is name call, I hope that you're twelve or under, otherwise consider yourself a village idiot.

Note there were no substantive counter arguments.

Well, actually, there were. They just weren't what you wanted to hear.

JoeB131, that's so apologetic I started to cry for poor George W. Bush. Who knew he had serious challenges, I guess maybe he wasn't up to the job? You think.

No, not really. I think he had a better grasp on things than Obama did. I criticized Bush for the things he deserves to be criticized for, and stick up for him on the things where he's getting a bad rap. Incidently, I do the same for Obama and often get called a liberal here.

And frankly, I know most people would trade their life under Bush for their life under Obama any day of the week if they were being honest.

Your reading of history is interesting as Carter and Clinton may be labeled anywhere on our political spectrum, but the effort to destroy them came from the right, aka conservatives, aka reactionaries - I use all interchangeably.

You use a lot of terms interchangeably, and this is probalby why your analysis isn't all that good.

First, Carter. The initial effort to take Carter down was from the left, not the right. Did you all just forget that he faced serious challenges from the left from Ted Kennedy and Gov. Moonbeam Jerry Brown? Or that one of the things that hurt him in the national election was left-leaning votes being sucked off by John Anderson. (I was there. I lived it.)

I also debate whether there was an effort to destroy Carter, or Carter collapse under the weight of his own ineptitude.

On the subject of Clinton, most of the efforts against him came from his own conduct, not his idealogy. Clinton's downfall, I think, was that he never realized the kind of backwater stuff you can get away with as a governor just doesn't play on the national stage because people pay attention.

Now, where I think the real flaw here is saying that the attempt to destroy is really "idealogical". There were attempts to destroy both Bush's, Reagan and they succeeded with Nixon (which is where the presidency really kind of lost it's prestige.)

I do agree none of the democrats have come up to the stature of a FDR or LBJ but corporations (money?) control ideas today and not enough vote or pay attention to outcomes rather than rhetoric. The left in America today is a creation of the right, not the other way around. Power likes power and likes to keep it. Fairness of any kind is taboo to the conservative. Every single progressive ideas is fought tooth and nail. But thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I think you are about half-right here. I would argue the modern right is a creation of the left. When the left embraced "Acid, Amnesty and Abortion", lots of people were horrified.

I think that if we ever got to a point where someone could combine liberal economics and conservative social stances, that would be a winning combination. Which is why the establishment goes into a panick when a Huckabee or a Santorum comes along.

 

[JoeB131]

A final point. The Democrats do just as good a job of trying to destroy people.

I remember how they used Iran-Contra to try to destroy Reagan, even though he was acting in America's interests and saved American lives.

I remember the Democrats absolutely crucified Bush for signing off on a tax increase after the S&L Crisis, even though everyone agreed it was needed to save the banking system at the time.

And I remember that all the prominant Democrats voted for the Iraq War, but they skewered Bush when things went south. Except Joe Leiberman.

 

[Peach]

Peach, There is no radical left in politics today. For those who think there is one, please provide names and examples of their radicalism.

I cited EXTREMISTS, not always political; I consider the NBP EXTREMIST, and would not call them CONSERVATIVE.

 

[Peach]

I remember how they used Iran-Contra to try to destroy Reagan, even though he was acting in America's interests and saved American lives.

Reagan could not remember anything, thus the quotes "I don't remember", "I can't recall"..................

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

When Mitt Romney said recently it is their turn, he really meant, go away, go back, that is stay where you belong, for privilege only rests with us, the elite, and fairness for all is not something we believe in.

True, we see examples of this with regard to voter ID laws, efforts to undermine privacy rights, and policies designed to deny Americans equal access to the law.

Indeed, there are conservatives who believe only owners of real property should be allowed to vote:

Tea Party Nation President Says It 'Makes A Lot Of Sense' To Restrict Voting Only To Property Owners | ThinkProgress

And conservatives have argued business owners should be allowed to discriminate concerning public accommodations, in violation of the Constitution:

The Washington Monthly

Clearly conservative dogma is at odds with the fundamental tenets of the American Republic, and the conservative notion of a ‘Republican Patrician Elite’ is particularly repulsive.

Peach, There is no radical left in politics today. For those who think there is one, please provide names and examples of their radicalism.

Correct. Not only is there no ‘radical left,’ but liberals in general have been placed in check since the Clinton years.

 

[rdean]

I think you are conflating several diffrent kinds of "conservatives" here.

First, I wouldn't call George W. Bush a failure

Thousands dead in a war of choice is the ULTIMATE failure for a President; he also refused to fund SELA requests for the ongoing NOLA levee restoration. We will never know if the levees would have failed had the work been on schedule. One of the WORST in US history. And, he took the heat OFF al Qaeda to send US troops to a war in Iraq deemed ILL PLANNED by the JCS.

Obama has not done great in office but anyone compared to baby Bush looks good, except for for Buchanan and Pierce.

George Bush has been the closest Republican have got to their extreme ideal. He was a "perfected" Republican.

 

[rdean]

When Mitt Romney said recently it is their turn, he really meant, go away, go back, that is stay where you belong, for privilege only rests with us, the elite, and fairness for all is not something we believe in.

True, we see examples of this with regard to voter ID laws, efforts to undermine privacy rights, and policies designed to deny Americans equal access to the law.

Indeed, there are conservatives who believe only owners of real property should be allowed to vote:

Tea Party Nation President Says It 'Makes A Lot Of Sense' To Restrict Voting Only To Property Owners | ThinkProgress

And conservatives have argued business owners should be allowed to discriminate concerning public accommodations, in violation of the Constitution:

The Washington Monthly

Clearly conservative dogma is at odds with the fundamental tenets of the American Republic, and the conservative notion of a ‘Republican Patrician Elite’ is particularly repulsive.

Peach, There is no radical left in politics today. For those who think there is one, please provide names and examples of their radicalism.

Correct. Not only is there no ‘radical left,’ but liberals in general have been placed in check since the Clinton years.

In check? Otherwise, what are the "extreme" things they would do. Be prepared to show evidence and back up your claims.

 

[Listening]

When Mitt Romney said recently it is their turn, he really meant, go away, go back, that is stay where you belong, for privilege only rests with us, the elite, and fairness for all is not something we believe in.

True, we see examples of this with regard to voter ID laws, efforts to undermine privacy rights, and policies designed to deny Americans equal access to the law.

Indeed, there are conservatives who believe only owners of real property should be allowed to vote:

Tea Party Nation President Says It 'Makes A Lot Of Sense' To Restrict Voting Only To Property Owners | ThinkProgress

And conservatives have argued business owners should be allowed to discriminate concerning public accommodations, in violation of the Constitution:

The Washington Monthly

Clearly conservative dogma is at odds with the fundamental tenets of the American Republic, and the conservative notion of a ‘Republican Patrician Elite’ is particularly repulsive.

Peach, There is no radical left in politics today. For those who think there is one, please provide names and examples of their radicalism.

Correct. Not only is there no ‘radical left,’ but liberals in general have been placed in check since the Clinton years.

In check? Otherwise, what are the "extreme" things they would do. Be prepared to show evidence and back up your claims.

Obamacare...

Cap and Trade

Etc.

 

[Listening]

Listening, So while good jobs are the answer to so many things in your mind, you'd still vote for the party that brought us the great depression and the great recession? That makes no rational sense, or only makes sense for a blind partisan or a .... http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186726-republican-ideology-through-history-7.html#post4251322

As for your second comment when you show me conservatives who protested the slaughter in Iraq during shock and awe, or who support living children who die every fifteen seconds in the world, you'd have a point, till then pro life is simply a moral crutch that requires nothing of the moralist. See this post: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...e-with-a-history-of-trauma-5.html#post4730878

Did I say family was an abstract? I come from a too large family, my mom lived the faith, and have an excellent one, all is well with us. Yikes, I should be a mindless conservative, but I just can't do it.

Sorry, but without your attaching the quotes you are referencing, it is tough to know what you are talking about.

So, I have to take things in general.

Let me start with the comment: "Yikes, I should be a mindless conservative, but I just can't do it. "

So, instead you are a mindless liberal. Good job. The study of what really happened in the great depression and great recession encompasses so many variables in so many dimensions that to blame it on one party is simply.....well, mindless.

To your second comment....me. I was against the war before it started and I still am against it. Support children in what way.....? With money ? I raise my hand again.

To family, you missed the point (there are pills for that mindlessness). There are people who can do an awful lot with little in an efficient economic engine like a family. Providing them with the liberty to change their circumstances is what the GOP is (or should be) about. Yoking them to government programs or killing the better jobs they might get with things like stupid energy policies....well, that is just democrats to a tee.

Have a good day trying to spin it up.

 

[rdean]

True, we see examples of this with regard to voter ID laws, efforts to undermine privacy rights, and policies designed to deny Americans equal access to the law.

Indeed, there are conservatives who believe only owners of real property should be allowed to vote:

Tea Party Nation President Says It 'Makes A Lot Of Sense' To Restrict Voting Only To Property Owners | ThinkProgress

And conservatives have argued business owners should be allowed to discriminate concerning public accommodations, in violation of the Constitution:

The Washington Monthly

Clearly conservative dogma is at odds with the fundamental tenets of the American Republic, and the conservative notion of a ‘Republican Patrician Elite’ is particularly repulsive.


Correct. Not only is there no ‘radical left,’ but liberals in general have been placed in check since the Clinton years.

In check? Otherwise, what are the "extreme" things they would do. Be prepared to show evidence and back up your claims.

Obamacare...

Cap and Trade

Etc.

Health care for Americans is "extreme"? Only to Republicans. To me, their policy of "let him die" is very extreme.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...is-reputation-they-seem-to-be-stuck-with.html

 

[AnonymousIV]

 

[dblack]

And conservatives have argued business owners should be allowed to discriminate concerning public accommodations, in violation of the Constitution:

The Washington Monthly

Meh.. you, and the Wasthingon 'Monthly' (and yes, the Supreme Court via 'case law') are equivocating on the term 'public' - essentially claiming ownership of the property and labor of anyone who operates a retail business. I'm pretty sure that's where conservatives disagree with you. So trying to wrangle that into an accusation of racism is disingenuous at best, deliberately deceptive at worst.

 

[midcan5]

How many times does one have to tell the children on USMB that ad hominem is not a counter argument? If the best you can do is name call, I hope that you're twelve or under, otherwise consider yourself a village idiot.

Note there were no substantive counter arguments.

Well, actually, there were. They just weren't what you wanted to hear.

Let me clarify my point that conservatism is nothing more than reactionary whining. A substantive reply would deny what I see as fact - that conservatives do not really care about any of the noble abstractions they preach, but only care about the status quo. An example of my point is the 2010 election, partly a result of the very strong influence of the tea party. The election mantra was jobs and restoring America. Well did you see any jobs or jobs bills? (I have an excellent piece on jobs I will be posting soon.) No, what you saw was social policy that turned back the clock on worker rights and women's rights. And attempts to turn back the clock on lots of other more progressive policies. And if you want a specific example of just how off the wall the reactionary conservatives are, look only at Allen West's comments on communists. Communists! Give me a break, we've been there, done that. And the tea party has been equally useless unless of course useless is the goal - in a sense it is. Clearly backs up the premise of the OP.

Some of the other stuff you wrote, I will reply when I have more time. And check other comments as well. You have to remember liberals are busy people, we actually do things.

 

[Listening]

In check? Otherwise, what are the "extreme" things they would do. Be prepared to show evidence and back up your claims.

Obamacare...

Cap and Trade

Etc.

Health care for Americans is "extreme"? Only to Republicans. To me, their policy of "let him die" is very extreme.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...is-reputation-they-seem-to-be-stuck-with.html

Health care for Americans is "extreme" ????

No wonder you assholes are going to lose in 2012.

Most Americans already have health care. Those who don't need some help.

Instead of fixing the system, Obama decides to try and revamp the whole thing impressing all kinds of liberal "redistribution" measures into it. And sucking in people who don't want to be sucked in (those who want to pay on the open market).

So, yes...."extreme".

Got it, asswipe ?