Is There Really Such A Thing As A Conservative?

quote:

---

From Political Animal:

A CONSERVATIVE TAKES ON WAL-MART....Stephen Bainbridge makes the conservative case against Wal-Mart today. You should read the whole thing to get a sense of his argument, but here's an incomplete summary:

So opening a Wal-Mart has a small positive effect on consumer prices and employment for the community. The latter effect dissipates over time as Wal-Mart drives competitors out of business or, at least, the area.

....By trampling small businesses underfoot, through its mix of volume pricing and subsidies, Wal-Mart and its ilk undermine the possibility of "wide participation in businesses." Prospective entrepreneurs are thus pushed out of fields like retail.

....Being a conservative is supposed to be about things like tradition, community, and, yes, aesthetics. If I'm right about that, it's hard to see why a conservative should regard Wal-Mart as a societal force for good....

---

Why should we be surprised that a conservative is against Walmart. What is a conservative anyways? If you listen to people like Rush Limbaugh - he's a conservative, and if you can't see things the way he does, you're bad, you're a liberal, and if you believe that, you're just as dumb as he is. If Walmart has done wrong, it is seen by both the liberal and conservative, whoever they are? There is no such thing folks. We have to stop thinking us against them and be the more inteligent and realize that God made everyone different, and no two people are alike, and to seperate anyone, even yourself into a catagory of others does you and others a disservation. This is a round world, and we all see a different part of it, we can only clearly see the part we're standing on. How great are those who posses the ability to see through the eyes of others and truely experience the rest of the world. We can do this if you stop thinking us against them.

This however does not dismantal the belief in evil. Evil is real; it kills people who should not die; it hurts people who should not hurt; it shuts out light and happeness that should be seen and felt. Evil works by making one good person and enemy of another good person, think about it.

I know that some who have been around can quickly point out I have done this. I'm not perfect. You catch me, say something. But to change the world, we've got to change our attitude, it's not to late.

A conservative is someone that both believes that evil exists and believes in absolute truths.

A liberal is an 'enlightened one' that has been liberated from such out-moded ideas like evil and absolute truths.

Some people who are not good at comprehending what they read are good at other things.

P.S. It is more than obious you have never listened to Rush Limbaugh.

Im sure he is way over your head...

LMAO

Conservatism has nothing to do with Truths. A conservative believes that things should remain the same. Not as they are now but as they were around, say, the turn of the century, around the time of the industrial revolution when government and big business were "buddies" and ordinary people were left to struggle through hardships just to survive. Today conservative politicians use religious-based ideas to cater to the ignorance of the middle-class and poor ("Don't worru about how hard your life is NOW cuz' there's a heavenly kingdom beyond them thar hills!". Liberals atleast extoll compassion and understanding as well as tolerance for those less fortunate or different than most, and they believe government should atleast try to understand and help them somehow in ways that Christ would do himself. Conservatives possess very little compassion and understanding, and stricly rationalized ideas about what should be done about these people (if nothing at all!)....Truth is, if Christ were alive today He would be telling people not to get involved in all this psuedo-political crap!...He'd be telling people to just be good to one another and go to church and pray even when unsavory things are going on around them, because as long as you have faith in Him all will be well. He would say, "No way do I wanna' be President, and no way do I want any of you to be President cuz' there's alot of devlish influence in politics!"" Truth is, in order for religion to work correctly it must stay out of politics (or else be corrupted like other faiths and be accustomed to intolerance and injustice against the people). Similarly, in order for our democracy to work it must not cater to any religious-based concepts to the point of "forcing" its subjects into obeying any religious law or doctrine, because neither God nor Christ would want its flock forced to follow Them because that would not be by choice, or an act of love. Sure, a government like this will not seem "christian" to most, b ut it would be what it's supposed to be--a system odf FREEDOM. And, sure, the world may go to the toilet under those conditions, but that's what's supposed to happen, isn't it?...The world going to hell while the faithful remained saved clinging to him!...In Truth, I honestly believe this so-called Anti-Christ everyone has been talking about is really a symbolic representation of Chrit's teachings being corrupted by the Harlot of government.......Just a thought...Thanx.

"A conservative believes that things should remain the same"

Its obvious you are not a political scientist. lol

Your statement couldn't be further from the truth (unless you are speaking about European conservatives). What's so funny is that you know damn well which ideology is the party of reform - which party in the last 20 years has proposed numerous changes (line-item veto, welfare reform, private s.s accounts, flat tax) even to the constitution (balanced budget amendment, marriage amendment)

What you don't understand is that conservatives believe in a collection of absolutes and they believe that the constitution did an excellent job of implementing many of these absolutes into law. Thus, a conservative is more likely to want to conserve the constitution and all of its principles. However, they are also the ones that will amend it when the system is not working. Conservatives have a proud history of fighting for change from Lincoln to Reagan. And if you think Conservatives use religious speech you should try reading the works of America's founders - even Jefferson.

Liberals do not extol compassion and understanding but despise anything and anyone that opposes their pet project of the week. Liberals cannot tolerate the opposition which is why it is liberals that call Bush Hitler and shot their guns at or tried to destroy numerous republican party headquarters during the last election. Liberals are so intolerant that they will personally attack people they disagree with (look at Sen. Reid's current attack on C. Thomas and liberals attack on Gannon because he is gay).

Liberals only use virtue if they believe it will serve their ultimate goal - which is and has been for 40 years power. Look at liberals defense of the Great Perjurer and Sexual Harasser and their unwillingness to throw him out of office for his crimes. Conservatives abandoned Nixon because ultimately they place virtue as being an absolute truth that cannot be abandoned at whim.

And please would you people stop telling us what Christ would be doing and saying if he were alive today. Its really beneath you especially when you consider that most of you haven't a clue as to what Christ really taught.

Lol!...xris...you've got a serious problem...and your tone and attitude seems almost angry, as well as self-rightous...I feel sorry for you and others like you who do not recognize the trouble your attitude is causing and will cause for the world very soon...There is something deeply and darkly wrong about your feeings and position...But I guess I could be wrong...Could you say the same?...I doubt it.

And all those reforms you mentioned...It seems to me they are all attempts to get things back the way they were many, many years ago, long before the Reform movements and Roosevelt. It's an attempt to keep social issues out of government responsibility--the Old Way.

Oh, and have a nice night.

Im self-righteous? Im not the one telling people how and what Christ would say today!

LMAO

And if you sense anger then that is the emotion that you are feeling when you are reading me - I dont get angry on here - that would be counter-productive. I am also not the one making personal attacks. So who has the problem?

"And all those reforms you mentioned...It seems to me they are all attempts to get things back the way they were many, many years ago, long before the Reform movements and Roosevelt. It's an attempt to keep social issues out of government responsibility--the Old Way."

Oh really? Like the flat-tax? the ss private accounts? the line-item veto? the balanced budget amendment? Those are old ways? You are clearly not familiar with American political history - lol

I will agree that Clinton is a black mark for the Democrats, Bush Jr isn't exactly a saint.

I voted for Reagon the first time. I was living on the east coast and watched the ranks of the homeless rise. Me and my wife used to go to the park and serve them coffee and donuts, I was ashamed that I voted for Reagon.

Carter didn't have a strong leadership style, that's why I didn't vote for him. The axis of evil saw Carter as a lamb to be slaughtered but feared Reagon. It might have been a good thing at the time for Reagon to be in office, but the better man was Carter, who never took credit for things he should have, but allowed Reagon to have the glory for the strength and security of our nation. Lets not forget the Kennedys who made it possible for blacks to sit in front of the bus like everyone else.

I believe there should be an even balance of Republicans and Democrats in office because both have good ideas, and both have bad ideas, and when you put them together, you have America.

Bush is not an icon for the republicans and niether is Clinton an icon for the Democrats. When it comes to sex scandles, Gannon comes to mind, whoa - that's funny. but we'll leave that one alone.

There are a lot of Republiicans driveing hybrid cars, they are the number one choice for neo cons I am told.

You can call me a liberal and say that liberals are this that and the other thing - I'll dissagree and tell you that you can't see.

likewise I can call you a conservative and do the same thing and you will dissagree.

Because we are not seeing people, we are seeing titles. It is not uncommon for someone registered as a Democrat to vote Republican or a Republican to vote Democratic. It happens all the time, and it has since America was born. Because people are people, not conservative or liberal.

Lol!...The more you write the more I realize how sensitive you are...chuckles...As far as what I imagine what Christ would think and feel today, I really only go by the records of his teachings...Now if what he taught was somehow misinterpreted by the various writers of the Bible, then I sincerely apologize, but that would make the Bible inaccurate, wouldn't it?...But, then again, if the records of his teaching are accurate then, of course, he would be just as compassionate and understanding as I imagine him to be, unless, of course, modern times would change him, in which case Christ and his teachings would be very unreliable. The Truth is it is people with conservative views who believe what they are doing (as far as the policies of governmen)t is what God and Christ would want are the self-rightous ones. Many conservatives use religion to justify and shroud intolerant and materialistic values. That's the sad part. Arguments and attitudes like yours are really not worth mine or anybody else's time. Have a nice day.

"I will agree that Clinton is a black mark for the Democrats, Bush Jr isn't exactly a saint."

Wow our first agreement. Would you also agree that the way the whole democrat party supported him regardless of the facts was also a disgrace and a black mark upon their integrity?

As for W (he isn't a junior) he has repeatedly claimed to be a sinner - in fact those recently revealed tapes show that the private man isn't different from the public man - now that does reveal integrity.

That's sad you have been so brainwashed re: Reagan. He is truly one of the greatest Presidents we have ever had. As for the homeless problem that's amazing how you blame the President - who's budget and policies created more jobs, more wealth and saved the American economy which resulted in saving numerous families from utter ruin. Maybe you should blame Carter and the Dems for emptying out the mental hospitals.

"When it comes to sex scandles, Gannon comes to mind, whoa - that's funny. but we'll leave that one alone. "

Exactly - man you make my earlier point - liberals are intolerant cruel people who only use compassion as a tool to gain power - look at their attacks on a gay man who is being attacked ONLY because he is gay and not liberal. Its amazing!

---

Now you are blaming Christians for believing that they should act in accordance with their God's will? That somehow makes them self-righteous? LMAO

Let me tell you what a self-righteous person would do - they would tell people how Christ would act and what he would say and how he would vote if he was living in America today. Sound familiar?

quote:

---

As for W (he isn't a junior) he has repeatedly claimed to be a sinner - in fact those recently revealed tapes show that the private man isn't different from the public man - now that does reveal integrity.

---

I'm confused, maybe when you think your telling us something, you just don't realize that your not telling us anything.

I think what you're saying is that Ws private life is sinful, but in his public life he's a saint and that's good, while the same thing can be said about Clinton, that's bad. I obviously missed something, because that makes no sense, that's just pure prejudice.

quote:

---

That's sad you have been so brainwashed re: Reagan. He is truly one of the greatest Presidents we have ever had. As for the homeless problem that's amazing how you blame the President - who's budget and policies created more jobs, more wealth and saved the American economy which resulted in saving numerous families from utter ruin. Maybe you should blame Carter and the Dems for emptying out the mental hospitals.

---

Let me see Xris - you were nine or ten years old, obviously you weren't a member of one the many families that ended up living on the street, if you had been, you'd see it differently I'm sure. I was there, serving my country on recruiting duty in New Haven, CT. And I voted (as I always do) for Reagon, and was sorry I did. He closed mental hospitals so mental patients had no place to stay but out on the street. It was called the trickle down theory - do you know why? We cut all the safety nets that kept the poor off the street and made it possible for the rich to prosper and they in turn will generously help the poor. He actually went on TV and told the churches that it was their responsibility to help the homeless; who were there because of government cuts. I was there, and you were just a kid at the time and only know what you read in a book. Luckily, a lot of the things (not all of them) that Reagon did have been undone. One thing about Reagon though, he wasn't as bad as Bush, he could win the war without a fight. Which is what has made him famous, he is given credit for winning the cold war. The credit is not all his, but he didn't mind taking it, but at least he didn't take us to war.

quote:

---

gay man who is being attacked ONLY because he is gay and not liberal. It's amazing!

---

Ah, but there's more to this story that likely won't be told - he was a gay prostitute who made a hundred dollars an hour. Obviously he was good, at least to someone in Washington thought so. Need I go on.

In answer to wizardslogic - Those who believe in Bush as doing the will God believe this not because they study the four gospels like it sounds like you do, no, it is there interpretation of Revelations, and you know how that goes. How many times in history did someone believe that Revelations was happening. Jehovah Witnesses is an example who literally believed that Hitler was the antichrist and the true believers had been taken. I personally prefer the Catholic interpretation of Revelations, they believe it is encrypted language speaking of the trials and tribulations the church was suffering through under Rome. If you ever visit the Catacombs, you can almost picture it in your mind.

I've spent some time overseas and I can tell you that the rest of the world is very different. Fanaticism reigns in America. It could be our history. The earliest settlers were criminals and then the pilgrims who were very strict in their religious beliefs. So this could be the origin of our fanaticism. We always go too far one way or another, we cannot see the middle ground. So many only see in black and white and cannot see in color.

Anyway - glad I could make you chuckle

"I think what you're saying is that Ws private life is sinful, but in his public life he's a saint and that's good, while the same thing can be said about Clinton, that's bad. I obviously missed something, because that makes no sense, that's just pure prejudice. "

Everyone is a sinner - some more than others yes - but we all sin - Bush has acknowledged his own sin and his sinful past - true? What I am saying that if you listen to those tapes you find that Bush said the same things privately that he says publicly so he is not hypocrite and has integrity - most all of his critics agreed that this is what the tapes reveal (to Bush's credit).

HOWEVER the same thing can not be said of Clinton - Clinton sinned in his public life (to state it your way). Clinton broke numerous laws from sexual harassment to felonious perjury to obstruction of justice. In this arena the two men are not comparable.

"Let me see Xris - you were nine or ten years old, obviously you weren't a member of one the many families that ended up living on the street, if you had been, you'd see it differently I'm sure."

Ok stop - that is an emotional & subjective argument and not appropriate to our discussion - try to remain rationale.

Regarding my age - I was 10 when Reagan was elected (I remember watching the returns on tv) and was 18 when he left office - however I am a political science and history major and have made the Reagan years a part of my educational expertise so when I talk about his administration I am not merely blowing smoke. For example, in my historical methods class, I wrote a huge paper analyzing Reaganomics and had to read and critique 2 books that were pro - two that were con and 1 that was from a non-partisan perspective. I only mention this to reveal that I have not only studied his admirers.

"He closed mental hospitals so mental patients had no place to stay but out on the street"

Wrong - this was not done by Reagan but by democrats who were so moved by Ken Kesey's book and the movie One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest that they wrote legislation making it extremely difficult to hold patients against their will. Furthermore, when Reagan took office the GNP was growing between .5 and 1.5% and the inflation rate was 11%. In 1990 the GNP was 31 percent above 1982 in real, inflation-adjusted terms. Basically, America had grown by nearly a third making it the biggest peacetime economic boom in U.S. history. Had it not been for Reaganomics think about all those poor people that would have suffered and all the millions that would have lost their jobs or not been able to find work.

"Ah, but there's more to this story that likely won't be told - he was a gay prostitute who made a hundred dollars an hour. Obviously he was good, at least to someone in Washington thought so. Need I go on. "

Yes you need to go on. What exactly is your point - that people who have shady pasts must forever pay a price for it? Or that people who try to better themselves should not be allowed to? I mean he was merely a journalist - what the hell difference does it make what sins he had in his closet? I tell you he is being attacked simply because he is gay and not a liberal. Had he been a liberal you would have never found out that he had worked for an escort service or had naked pictures of himself on gay websites. And had he been attacked the liberal establishment would have screamed bloody murder and called those attackers homophobes,etc. No Gannon is proof that the Left uses compassion and tolerance only when it serves their purpose and that their only goal is to achieve power at any cost. And Gannon is not the only recent example - look at what the Senate Minority Leader - Harry Reid (NV) recently said about Clarence Thomas - the fact is that he called the man stupid because he is a black conservative - had Thomas been liberal he would be beloved by Reid or if he were white he would be repected by Reid in the same manner he respects Scalia. Where was Reid's tolerance and compassion? When Reid was called for his racist statements he tried citing a court case where he said Thomas wrote the minority decision and that it was written so poorly that a child could have written it. But in truth Thomas hadn't written the decision in that case at all and Reid was lying. What we have here is further proof that many democrats are racists who use blacks only to achieve power.