What's a Conservative???

[skinny21]

I think the whole debate/discussion is made tougher by a variety of factors.  

 

Take climate change.  IMO, a conservative should want to conserve our natural resources, our air and water quality, our natural areas.  However, a conservative should also want to maintain the status quo with regards to businesses and factories, which brings with it all sorts of pollution.  

And so, as best as I can tell, a conservative is sort of caught in the middle on this issue between Democrats (that want large changes to pollution) and Republicans (unfettered businesses).  

 

The national debt - the trend seems to be that Democrats want the budget as balanced as it can be while pursuing a progressive agenda in terms welfare, international aid, etc.  Republicans have done pretty poorly with the budget/National debt, but seem(?) to pursue some other conservative ideals*.  So again, conservatives seem to be caught in the middle.  

 

*I’ll be honest, I’m not sure which ones. Is it conservative to give the military more money than they want?  To make the rich richer?  To cut social safety nets?  This is made more confusing (to me) since Roe v Wade, Civil Rights, the Voting Rights Act, etc. have become the status quo, so bucking them seem to be (as said earlier) ‘retro’, not ‘conservative’.  

[Renegade7]

13 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Who think they're getting what they want even if they're actually getting **** on....

 

I knew what you meant though.

This is one if the ultimate failures if the democratic party not being to get this point across.

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, skinny21 said:

I think the whole debate/discussion is made tougher by a variety of factors.  

 

A lot of valid points, and have to agree.  I believe it will help the Republican party to do something preventing private funding for campaigns and banning political ads to help minimize the influence of Corporate America.  By continuing to cut taxes,they lose their stance on fiscal responsibility. Trying to move our regulatory system to a period before the EPA is absolutely not maintaining the status quo, and I don't even believe supported mainstream among the GOP.

[ClaytoAli]

Nope nope and nope on page 30

 

...Statehood for the District can be advanced only by a constitutional amendment. Any other ap- proach would be invalid. A statehood amendment was soundly rejected by the states when last pro- posed in 1976 and should not be revived.

[Renegade7]

22 minutes ago, ClaytoAli said:

Nope nope and nope on page 30

 

...Statehood for the District can be advanced only by a constitutional amendment. Any other ap- proach would be invalid. A statehood amendment was soundly rejected by the states when last pro- posed in 1976 and should not be revived.

I feel like that's more a survival mode value then a conservative one.  As enamored as Republicans are with states rights, they don't want to give any to territories that are going to be obviously blue.

 

Another thing that pisses more is notion having a strong military is a conservative value.  The Democratic Platform for 2016 clearly states in opening section wanting to maintain military superiority as well:

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/117717.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwidu9ycv6zdAhUHNd8KHVGzCe8QFjAAegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw343cxBzbOgA-K9Cn0s2gsO&cshid=1536447181298

 

[ClaytoAli]

Women lie, men lie, but money doesn’t lie so no majority legislative party will ever do this because of the good ol’ dollar - page 27:

 

Advancing Term Limits
Our national platform has repeatedly endorsed term limits for Members of Congress. In response, the GOP Leadership in 1996 brought to a vote, in both the House and Senate, a constitutional amendment. It failed to secure the necessary two-thirds vote in the House, where 80 percent of Republicans voted for it and 80 percent of Democrats voted against it. Every Senate Republican voted to allow a vote on term limits, but the Democrats killed it by a filibuster. Blocked by that opposition, Republicans sought other ways to modernize the national legislature. They set term limits for their own committee chairs and leadership positions, and by law they required Congress to live by the same rules it imposes on others. To make further progress, to advance a constitutional amendment for consideration by the states, we must expand the current Republican majorities in both chambers.

 

Above all, they just want to be able to say they put forth a vote. They will kill it if it ever got through.

[TheGreatBuzz]

18 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

A real conservative? Nowadays, a true conservative is a Ronin... socially adrift with no political party to represent their philosophy or beliefs. I have a lot of respect for real conservatives. There's at least one on this board (even though we've pissed each other off more than a few times recently).

Me?

 

I've gone of the rails a few times here getting upset when people refer to the Right or the GOP as "conservatives".  There really isn't anything conservative about their current form.  I consider myself a true conservative.  I believe there should be a requirement for a balanced budget.  I believe in a strong military but also believe that could be had for half the price if you got rid of fraud, waste, and abuse.  That applies to most other aspects of the government.  But I also know we are too far gone in that aspect and our society could not handle the unemployment if we got rid of government excess.  I believe in the Oxford comma.  Two spaces go after a period.  I believe in individual rights.  I believe businesses should be able to discriminate to a point but also rely on protests and capitalism to drive them out of business (reconsidering this in the Trump era).  I believe in state's rights (not to the slavery level) and if you don't like your state, rally a change or ****ing move.  I strongly support the 2nd amendment but also don't think it means we should all have machine guns.

 

I think actual conservatives are like the Jedi in Episode IV now.  Driven to the shadows trying to figure out how the hell to get rid of the assholes on the dark side that are perverting what we believe in.  I just need my lightsaber.

 

9 hours ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Conservatives listen to podcasts and masturbate in shame.

 

Liberals listen to music and dance and have rewarding social lives.

Perfect example of why I said the first two lines.  And a firm reminder that the liberals have their own ignorance to deal with. 

[Burgold]

The truth is, I don’t really care what Conservatives say they are I care what they show themselves to be. 

 

On a functional level, modern conservatism stands for tax cuts. I’m not sure it consistently has stood for anything else. 

 

It also frequently stands for: 

supporting the military industrial complex

supporting corporate rights

gerrymandering and voter suppression 

 

Most recently it stands for:

undercutting our allies and weakening our national security 

 

propping up and supporting dictators

 

tearing down every institution that made the US strong 

[TheGreatBuzz]

26 minutes ago, Burgold said:

On a functional level, modern conservatism stands for tax cuts. I’m not sure it consistently has stood for anything else. 

 

It also frequently stands for: 

supporting the military industrial complex

supporting corporate rights

gerrymandering and voter suppression 

 

Most recently it stands for:

undercutting our allies and weakening our national security 

 

propping up and supporting dictators

 

tearing down every institution that made the US strong 

To me, you are making the same mistake as someone defining christianity based on looking at a televangelist or well.........90% of "Christians".  

 

A belief has gotten so perverted by the selfish that claim a belief without actually following it.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Me?

Alright then, two true conservatives that I respect on this board. Heck, it actually might be more than that... I'll go as high as three ?

 

It wasn't you I was thinking of when I wrote that but I like you just fine GB. Apologies for the oversight.

[Burgold]

6 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

To me, you are making the same mistake as someone defining christianity based on looking at a televangelist or well.........90% of "Christians".  

 

A belief has gotten so perverted by the selfish that claim a belief without actually following it.

I get that and it's probably a fair complaint. On the other hand, I've been hearing people claiming to be conservatives who are described by others as conservatives pretty much my whole life. And at some point, a man or group ought to be judged by their actions. Since the 1980's, Conservatism has not been about small government, economic conservatism, and state's/individual's rights. More, there has been no visible push back to take Conservatism back to its roots. So, maybe what we used to think of as Conservatism is dead. Maybe that kind of conservatism belongs to the tiniest of fringe groups? Maybe it never was.

 

Now, if what you are saying is that Washington's elected conservatives are all televangelists bilking the faithful, I can buy that, but if that's the case, then conservatives are awfully stupid and gullible. Washington's elected conservatives do not believe in minimal government, they want to control your bedroom, who you marry, etc. They don't believe in fiscal conservatism, the debt is their best friend and they are endlessly plying it with pork laden gifts. Washington's elected conservatives do not support the military. They leave vets out to dry. They don't do well enough for the soldier. They do however love the industrial military complex. That's who they support. Washington's elected conservatives don't even believe in law enforcement, look how readily they turn on the FBI and other agencies.

 

So, in practical terms, modern Conservatives is about tax cuts. It's about maximizing the representative reach of lobbyists and the billionaire class while minimizing the voice of the poor, those in minority groups, those who are sick/disabled, etc.

 

The Conservativism to which you hew too (and I do believe that you do or you try to) is a mythical unicorn. The Republican Party (especially in Washington, but as a whole really) doesn't even pretend to follow its principles; they just sermonize about it and demonize others as the enemies of it.

[Kosher Ham]

Someone that believes that every kid ( or adult) does not deserve a trophy. 

 

I suppose I am conservative. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

5 hours ago, Burgold said:

I get that and it's probably a fair complaint. On the other hand, I've been hearing people claiming to be conservatives who are described by others as conservatives pretty much my whole life. And at some point, a man or group ought to be judged by their actions. Since the 1980's, Conservatism has not been about small government, economic conservatism, and state's/individual's rights. More, there has been no visible push back to take Conservatism back to its roots. So, maybe what we used to think of as Conservatism is dead. Maybe that kind of conservatism belongs to the tiniest of fringe groups? Maybe it never was.

I see this also.  Reminds me of a post I made a while back about the confederate flag (I think that was  the topic).  Anyways, I had something like you can say a word or symbol means a certain thing to but have to accept that society has changed the definition and you need to find a new word or symbol for your beliefs.  Problem is if I accept that "conservative" has been stolen, what do I call myself now?

 

5 hours ago, Burgold said:

Now, if what you are saying is that Washington's elected conservatives are all televangelists bilking the faithful, I can buy that, but if that's the case, then conservatives are awfully stupid and gullible.

Just like the people in the church pews.  And you can find plenty examples on both sides of the aisle.  But I'm going to stay away from that too much because I don't want to get too far off point.

 

5 hours ago, Burgold said:

They leave vets out to dry.

I do want to address this just because it is near and dear to me.  Neither side takes care of vets like they should.  However, vets do a good job at screwing other vets over.  Part of the reason the VA is so bad is because they are getting far more "disabled" than they should.  I spend a lot of time at the hospital now due to my injury (a legit injury with the MRI to prove it) and see way to many people coming in for treatment on their chronic hangnails because they want the disability pay and benefits.  Meanwhile the guy with no legs can't get an appointment because all the doctors are treating the patients with their hangnails.  ***Obviously this is a little over-dramatic.  But you get the point.  Everyone has some *disability and the system gets overloaded so it can't keep up with the legit disability.

 

5 hours ago, Burgold said:

The Conservativism to which you hew too (and I do believe that you do or you try to) is a mythical unicorn.

So what am I to do?  Where do I belong?

 

I do find myself more Libertarian lately.  They have their parts I don't agree with.  But they at least seem like they DON'T require every person to toe the line or get out.  I've gone to a few meetings and have had an overall good experience.

 

******edited twice.  Off my game this morning.  Should be correct now.

[tshile]

23 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

 

It is only recent, if "recent" is over 30+ years ago.

 

I do not agree with this. Between healthcare, the ltgbq movement (which includes the increased role this type of person now plays in standard tv and movies (which seems to be well above and beyond what their actual representation in society is)), and an ever increasing role of government control on aspects of our lives (and other things you’d probably need to get from someone who actually is upset about this to further comment on) I think it’s quite clear the country has moved significantly towards liberal ideals over the last 20 years. 

 

Even our more prominent liberal posters have commented that the country has moved to the left quite a bit in recent years. 

 

Im not saying they’re solutions are right or their ideas are better, just that it’s a gripe they have and the “moving to the right” argument about the country (which we hear sometimes) is not just overplayed it’s flat out wrong especially on social issues. 

 

I know it’s common to blame the current state on white people being upset about having a black president (which those people exist but the claim is quite clearly not backed by actual evidence of what people voted for whom) but I think there’s a better explanation about globalism and the liberalization that’s gone on. 

 

Im just not someone that’s bent out of shape about it so it would be unfair for me to argue the positions any further. 

[Springfield]

4 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

I do not agree with this. Between healthcare, the ltgbq movement (which includes the increased role this type of person now plays in standard tv and movies (which seems to be well above and beyond what their actual representation in society is)), and an ever increasing role of government control on aspects of our lives (and other things you’d probably need to get from someone who actually is upset about this to further comment on) I think it’s quite clear the country has moved significantly towards liberal ideals over the last 20 years. 

 

Even our more prominent liberal posters have commented that the country has moved to the left quite a bit in recent years. 

 

Im not saying they’re solutions are right or their ideas are better, just that it’s a gripe they have and the “moving to the right” argument about the country (which we hear sometimes) is not just overplayed it’s flat out wrong especially on social issues. 

 

I know it’s common to blame the current state on white people being upset about having a black president (which those people exist but the claim is quite clearly not backed by actual evidence of what people voted for whom) but I think there’s a better explanation about globalism and the liberalization that’s gone on. 

 

Im just not someone that’s bent out of shape about it so it would be unfair for me to argue the positions any further. 

 

I do not agree that this country has moved left, particularly on things like economic issues.

 

The lack of oversight on economic mechanisms are huge and the country seems to love it.  It lets people get loans, amass credit card debt and jump into the workforce with 80k in student loan debt.  There’s going to be some sort of crash and it’s because the country loves getting its money for nothing.  Republicans exploit this as a lack of government oversight, or “interference”.

 

Related is deregulation.  Republicans are going to deregulate us back to the Stone Age because Democrats won’t fight it.  When nobody believes the government is helpful, republicans get their way.  Republicans created the EPA, now they want it gone.  Again, country has shifted right on this.

 

Taxes.  Country has definitely gone right.  A tax increase is political suicide.  Again, goes back to the general belief that the government is useless.  Republicans would lower the tax down to 0 if they could.

 

No chance you could pass a new deal in today’s climate.  This is because the country has shifted right on social works.  No chance social security, Medicaid or Medicare make it to light because the country has elected people who would oppose it.

 

 

Ill give you social issue like gay marriage or marijuana legalization.  Racial discrimination, stuff like that.  Sure.

 

There are some clear areas where the country has slid right to me.  Those areas, in my opinion, are the ones that require empathy and a willingness to put the country above your own interests.

[Burgold]

14 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

So what am I to do?  Where do I belong?

 

I do find myself more Libertarian lately.  They have their parts I don't agree with.  But they at least seem like they DON'T require every person to toe the line or get out.  I've gone to a few meetings and have had an overall good experience.

 

******edited twice.  Off my game this morning.  Should be correct now.

I don't know. I think a big part of the problem these days is the team affiliation of political ideologies. The Bernie Bros being a negative example on the left. This idea that if you are a conservative or a liberal and must voice agreement with every opinion or blindly okay every politician while hating the other side no matter what their idea is (esp. if that idea might do some good) is horrible.

 

I lazily identify myself as liberal because if we put all the issues on a scatterplot I find myself more in that quadrant. However, I have never had any hesitation in calling out my side when "our" ideas are stupid, dangerous, or evil. Likewise, I would like to see that in Conservative circles. If "your" side is establishing Interment Camps or buddying up with Putin or very obviously weakening National Defense for a politician's personal gain... they need to be called out, voted against, and rejected.

 

How we can get to a place where we debate ideas instead of acting like high school cliques, I don't know, but the idea should be the best idea wins out and even better the best synthesis/comprise of plans put forward.

 

These crusades against everything liberal or everything conservative only harm us. That said, a crusade against everything Trump, seems in the best interest of the country and should be embraced by libs and conservs alike. 

[tshile]

6 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I do find myself more Libertarian lately. 

 

I would caution against this  As you read through their ideas just keep asking yourself how often they rely on business magically doing what’s right not just for them but for the bigger picture. Then ask yourself if that seems realistic. 

[tshile]

21 minutes ago, Burgold said:

How we can get to a place where we debate ideas instead of acting like high school cliques, I don't know, but the idea should be the best idea wins out and even better the best synthesis/comprise of plans put forward.

 

Start calling people out for what they are. Stop pretending two ideas are of equal merit under the guise of respecting differing opinions. Stop pretending an idea deserves respect simply because it’s an idea. 

 

Find a way to remove stupid people from the equation. 

 

The system caters to those who keep it in power. So long as majority of the country is happy supporting their own team through thick and thin I don’t see it changing. We have a serious lack of understanding of statistics, what a scientific study is and isn’t saying, how to determine root causes.... 

 

and that problem exists seemingly equally on both sides. For every right winger you can find denying the science behind climate change, I can find a left winger arguing against a social injustice predicated on a complete lack of understanding of statistics (and subsequently a fool believing conclusions on studies they don’t understand)

 

we need a smarter and more compassionate voting population. Good luck. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

7 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

I would caution against this  As you read through their ideas just keep asking yourself how often they rely on business magically doing what’s right not just for them but for the bigger picture. Then ask yourself if that seems realistic. 

Oh I know they have their own issues.  Not saying they are a perfect or even great match for me.  Just more so than Dems or the current trash heap that is the GOP.  And I am also closer to them on the local level.  One discussion I had with a local candidate was interesting in that he was willing to say there was things he went against his party.  We also had a long debate about gun rights.  We didn't agree but actually were able to have an adult discussion and listen to each other and shake hands when it was done.

[tshile]

I’ve been thinking more about what appeals to me about consevatism, especially considering the problems I have with how it’s exercised. 

 

To me a fundamental difference is conservatives tend to believe that one’s situation can be observed as the result of a series of decisions that lead to it (many times the outcome being easily seen as the result long before the result occurs) whereas liberals tend to view someone a situation as the result of an inherintly unfair system. 

 

As i reflect on all I’ve seen, and personally been a part of, I can certainly find people who did the right things and got screwed for one reason or another (corruption, bad luck, or having bad/no role models to mentor them). And when I see those situations I genuinely feel bad and am willing to consider changes to help prevent it in the future or correcting the current situation. 

 

But thats few and far between. 

 

I’ve seen a lot of people in good and bad situations. Both personally observing it, and reading about it. I’ve also had my own share of each. And almost every time it’s the result of their decision making through life. I do not feel bad for those people and I have no interest in helping them. 

 

At one point I did care and was interested in helping them. But over the years a constant theme from the liberals has come up that absolutely floors me - that the people that sacrificed near term for long term success should watch others that refused short term sacrifices and got long term bad outcomes now get help. So these people didn’t have to sacrifice and are now getting rewarded for it. 

 

The people who did sacrifice? They get nothing. There’s usually a sentiment from the liberals that they can afford it, or that they are are doing just fine and don’t need anything. Or that they’re just lucky, and somehow don’t deserve what they now have. It’s a complete disregard for how people get to where they are. Its a slap in the face and sometimes it comes with the liberals smiling about how they just do not give a **** about your sacrifices. 

 

 

I also want to make it a point to say there’s a difference between not thinking someone deserves help and taking joy in watching someone in a bad position. I do not take joy in it. It saddens me greatly, especially in situations where I think I had great and smart role models to guide me and they maybe didn’t and maybe that’s why our life decisions are different. Especially with my close friends where I’ve tried very hard to help and offer guidance along the ways to get them off a bad track and (for whatever reason) they didn’t take the help or guidance. 

 

[Renegade7]

On 9/8/2018 at 8:55 PM, TheGreatBuzz said:

Perfect example of why I said the first two lines.  And a firm reminder that the liberals have their own ignorance to deal with. 

 

When you say that, do you mean in general, or the same number as conservatives right now?  Both sides have idiots, a lot of people that claim to be conservatives but are really just caught up in this populism thing.

14 hours ago, Kosher Ham said:

Someone that believes that every kid ( or adult) does not deserve a trophy. 

 

I suppose I am conservative. 

Part of me hopes people don't believe that's what most people on the left want.  Saying we should be held to the results of our decisions are fair if we were starting at the same point.  Some people have to make choices others don't have to everyday just to keep pace or catch up. 

[Renegade7]

On 9/8/2018 at 9:46 PM, TheGreatBuzz said:

To me, you are making the same mistake as someone defining christianity based on looking at a televangelist or well.........90% of "Christians".  

 

A belief has gotten so perverted by the selfish that claim a belief without actually following it.

Trump has an 85% approval rating among republicans.  Fair to say all Republicans aren't conservatives, but I won't believe you if you say none of them are.  I believe what we're seeing is more people okay with Authoritarian Conservatism, which is still conservatism, along with not letting go on Social Conservatism.  The more I think about a true conservative, sounds more like a moderate conservative or the ones that adhere to what was considered conservative values the Republican Party stood for when they didn't have to hold their nose to vote for them.

12 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I see this also.  Reminds me of a post I made a while back about the confederate flag (I think that was  the topic).  Anyways, I had something like you can say a word or symbol means a certain thing to but have to accept that society has changed the definition and you need to find a new word or symbol for your beliefs.  Problem is if I accept that "conservative" has been stolen, what do I call myself now?

You're still a conservative, just don't agree with different parts of that political spectrum that some are.  I mean, you certainly wouldn't be considered a liberal...yet.

 

Lets keep in mind that yes, the definition of what's liberal or conservative in this country does change over time.  Feel that's why its important to look at the many different parts of this, same way we did with Democratic Socialism not to long ago.

[Renegade7]

11 hours ago, tshile said:

 

The people who did sacrifice? They get nothing. There’s usually a sentiment from the liberals that they can afford it, or that they are are doing just fine and don’t need anything. Or that they’re just lucky, and somehow don’t deserve what they now have. It’s a complete disregard for how people get to where they are. Its a slap in the face and sometimes it comes with the liberals smiling about how they just do not give a **** about your sacrifices. 

 

 

There's bad apples on both sides, but this can really being boiled down to taxes should be higher on the rich then they are.  Regardless of how personal people make it, which is not as common as you make it sound.  

 

Your discussion on choices don't ring home with me who have situations choosen for them before they get a chance to make one.  Like single parent children, that's hard for the single parent to have the same impact as two, stats don't lie on that, and it makes total sense.  Not everyone can afford pre-school, some countries are trying to make that universally accessible.  

 

I've talked to conservatives where the compromise in regards to people's choices is to put resources towards helping people as early in life as you can, instead of waiting until they adults asking for welfare.  This means we should do something like universal access to preschool.  You can't give the same number of resources to schools in bad neighbhorhoods as you do good neighborhoods.  The good neighborhoods typically have more of their own resources to devote to their children then the parents that don't.  That's where the even playing field should be focused on at least, we can get to stuff like wages seperately.

 

I never understood the emphasis of some conservatives being against abortion so adamantly then wanting to cut social programs for kids, or holding CHIP hostage.  That's not conservative, that's BS.