What is a "real" conservative or "real" liberal?

Pointer, when the two gay men were arrested and prosecuted just a few years ago for what they were doing in private, are you saying that no "conservatives" were involved?
Click to expand...
You are making a conclusion which has no bearing on the point.

When they were found guilty and sentenced, which "conservatives" contributed to their appeals process?
Click to expand...
The primarily Conservative majority of the US Supreme Court... :rolleyes:

And when the Supreme Court judged that the men were innocent because sodomy laws were an unConstitutional breach of privacy, which "conservative" group hailed this decision as a win for conservative ideals?
Click to expand...
Why must a conservative "group" "hail" the success of a conservative ideal?
ESPECIALLY when corrupted liberal news media and leadership would like nothing more than to say we only "hail" the correctness of a law when it serves our purposes and never when it serves the purposes of our opposition... :rolleyes:

You'll pardon me if I find your exciting new definition of social conservatism unfamiliar. I'm sure you have simple answers to the above questions.
Click to expand...
Is there something wrong with simple, and to-the-point, answers?
Oops! Of course there is... propaganda is always shrouded in complexity...
Perhaps you are "unfamiliar" with that as well. :)

My definition of Conservative thinking is founded on the principles "on which this nation stands"...and that is conservative. The Supreme Court was recognizing the even application of law when they acquitted the two "gays" you mentioned above... They didn't have to like it, and they didn't have to "hail" it in celebration. :)
 
Last edited:
It had nothing to do with gay anything. It was a good decision, well inline with the ideals of our country.

My point was, if that is what conservatives are all about, why would no "conservative" speak up for the case and the principle?


You seem to want to take credit for a libertarian attitude, but then assign it to Conservatives. While that may be what YOU think defines a conservative such as yourself, it doesn't sound like you'd be in very good company with the kind of conservatives we are all so familiar with.

The current understanding of conservative includes many elements, mostly southern "Christian", that are at direct odds with your live and let live attitude.

I don't call myself "conservative" because I don't want people to think that I distrust science, want to run people's lives for them and advocate military spending beyond need or usefulness. But if you want to kick all those people out of the conservatives, I'll be glad to join your club.


Until then I will remain part of the growing "neither" that wants no association with either the financial or moral babysitters.
 
Small point of order.

The founders of this country were mostly Liberal thinkers. Unfortunately, liberal today doesn't mean the same thing it used to.

And of course, the same thing may be said of conservatives....
 
To get this back on track, I tried Goslash27's survey. It kind of surprised me. I am dead center as far as left/right, but I scored a 1.64 towards authoritarian. The test may be best served with a "no opinion" answer.
 
Weather you like it or not, the mainstream of America really does not want to be bothered with homosexuality. Yet the liberals just love to jam it into everyones faces because of that very reason.
Click to expand...


Mainstream America probably doesn't care what happens in the privacy of ones home, but the current crop of "conservatives" (aka The American Taliban) seem hell bent on jamming their noses into the private lives of people, especially their sex lives.

Conservatives ASBSOLUTELY do not care what you do behind closed doors. Conservatives could care less if you want to take a same-sex partner for a night or for the rest of your life.
JUST DON"T BE "IN YOUR FACE" ABOUT IT!
Click to expand...

Really, there must be a whole new group of conservatives out there who
I don't know about.
If the conservatives would back off from trying to decide who I may sleep with, and interfere with my right to decide whether, when, and how many children I'm going to have, they wouldn't find anyone getting "in their face".
 
If the conservatives would back off from trying to decide who I may sleep with, and interfere with my right to decide whether, when, and how many children I'm going to have, they wouldn't find anyone getting "in their face".
Click to expand...
I'll grant you that possibility...

current crop of "conservatives" (aka The American Taliban) seem hell bent on jamming their noses into the private lives of people, especially their sex lives.
Click to expand...

The magic word is "seem"...

Because all the Southern Baptists and the Religious Right are, in fact, conservatives, it doesn't make all Conservatives religious fanatics...

I don't care how kinky you are...

What goes on PRIVATELY between consenting ADULTS is their business. Just don"t advertise your sexual preferences as if they were your favorite food types... like Mexican, Greek, Italian or Chinese.
 
Pointer,

How useful is your definition of "conservative" if you don't want to apply it to the residents of most of the Red states?
 
if you don't want to apply it to the residents of most of the Red states?
Click to expand...
I said no such thing... and even you can't extrapolate this for your anti-conservative propaganda.

You just make it up as you go along... :rolleyes:
 
The magic word is "seem"...

Because all the Southern Baptists and the Religious Right are, in fact, conservatives, it doesn't make all Conservatives religious fanatics...
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, they are the ones with the loudest voices today, the ones putting the "face" on all conservatives. I'd really like to believe that conservatism still means smaller government and less taxes, but a quick visit to GOP.Com shows me something different.
 
I realize that isn't what you "said". But, as Mthalo posts, it is pretty much the implication since the loudest voices of "conservatism" do not share your views.

Is that clear enough?
 
I'd really like to believe that conservatism still means smaller government and less taxes, but a quick visit to GOP.Com shows me something different.
Click to expand...

Conservatism hasn't changed... just the "elements" like the Republicans and the Religious Right.

It still means smaller government, BUT the Whitehouse Republicans have had to move more and more to the left over the passed 50 or 100 years... in order to get elected or have a voice...

50+ years ago, almost all Americans were either Conservative Democrats like Zell Miller, or Conservative Republicans like Dwight Eisenhauer...

If a President was elected from one party, the other party could still feel that the President of the United States was everybody's President... Now that's true patriotism.

I lay the greater fault for this "polarization" on the liberal left which has sold itself to the "devil of the radical left" in order to get the political attention they want. Then, too, on the reactionary Religious Right who started thumping their Bibles when they saw the left getting more than their share of attention... The Silent Majority has come out of the liberally induced stupor with a loud squawk and they will be heard "come hell or high water".

Back then, the difference between the parties was not so much found in what to do but in how to do it. :)
 
I lay the greater fault for this "polarization" on the liberal left which has sold itself to the "devil of the radical left" in order to get the political attention they want.
Click to expand...

Pointer, some people educated in the last couple of decades might be shocked to learn this isn't a statement made in a vacuum. There is good historical evidence that this radicalization and polarization is one of the driving forces behind violent revolution and the process of development in American liberal thought predictably leads in this direction. Link to a brief bio of historian Crane Brinton with a short reading list of his important works.
 
The current American far left is much less likely to be the source of violent anything. The extreme right, on the other hand, has been stockpiling weapons and calling for civil war for decades.

I don't think "Stormfront" or the Michigan Militia represent the majority of conservatives, but they are quite definitely radical conservatives, not liberals.
 
I'm not certain how this thread has even gotten this far without properly defining the terms. There are conservatives(classical liberals) and there are leftists in today's politics. The word liberal in the title here has no meaning, actually. Also, increasingly, there are no real conservatives on the national scene, as the Repubs keep drifting left as the Dems drift further left towards socialism. Thus we're left with varying shades of failure, and a thread that misses the point.
 
The current American far left is much less likely to be the source of violent anything. The extreme right, on the other hand, has been stockpiling weapons and calling for civil war for decades.
Click to expand...

Funny, then, that all the violence historically has come and continues to come from the left, eh? Before you say it, McVeigh was no militia member, no conservative and would simply be the exception that demonstrates the rule anyway, so go ahead and trot out OKC if you want...
 
All which violence, exactly?

Are you calling gang bangers and rioters card carrying Democrats?


You actually have to have political beliefs to be categorized politically, you know. Meek's post and my reply was about violent revolution - which violent revolution are you speaking of?
 
It is both the extreme right and the extreme left who are prone to violence. The line of political identity isn't straight, it's curved and the extremities almost touch. They are both ready to use violence to get their way.

Handy said:
The current American far left is much less likely to be the source of violent anything.
Click to expand...
Handy - Have you forgotten the protests in Seattle against the WTO in 2003? How about PETA and ELF? I'm not saying that leftists are more violent than rightists, but "much less likely" is just plain wrong.

-Dave
 
Bluesman,

What weapons caches were brought out in Washington? How many dead?

You can't stage a revolution by throwing trash and breaking windows. All angry crowds have the capacity for violence, but that is not the same as saying that the group represented is preparing for violent action. I don't imagine the protest organizers were pleased with the crowd's behavior.


Meek's post was about violent revolution. Again, which leftist organization are you saying is preparing for that?
 
Also, increasingly, there are no real conservatives on the national scene, as the Repubs keep drifting left as the Dems drift further left towards socialism.
Click to expand...

How are the Republicans drifting towards the left? With Bush and his cronies constant attempts to erode individual liberties with crap like the Patriot Act, I think they're moving towards facism.

What actions indicate a move left?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top