New conservative movement?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I could even see myself voting for the likes of Joseph Biden. To me, Senator Obama on a Democratic ticket would be admirable. - JesseJames

That would certainly not be a pro-gun sentiment. Those guys are both socialists, certainly Biden known to side with gun control at every opportunity, one of the senior leaders of a party that wants to take your guns away. He is also on the Judiciary committee and a prominent figure in trying to make the Supreme Court increasingly liberal with the Constitution.
 
Thanks for the heads-up Realgun. I'll take a more scrutinizing look at the politicians on vote-smart.org when I get some more free time. I guess I was looking for someone who possessed some stature.
To be honest, none of the prominent politicians are truly inspiring.
 
The problem is that real conservatives, like real libertarians, are not all that interested in elected office. They want less to do with government, not to be in it 100% of the time.

That leaves those who think they can tweak government and somehow fix it. You can't fix it. It needs to be drastically downsized. But to do that, you need politicians coming into the system that believe in that. Right now they are few and far between.

You need conservatives to run for dog catcher, and mayor, and alderman. And then the next rung up.
 
The problem is that real conservatives, like real libertarians, are not all that interested in elected office. They want less to do with government, not to be in it 100% of the time.

That leaves those who think they can tweak government and somehow fix it. You can't fix it. It needs to be drastically downsized. But to do that, you need politicians coming into the system that believe in that. Right now they are few and far between.

You need conservatives to run for dog catcher, and mayor, and alderman. And then the next rung up.

I does seem to be trending that way. This quote might sum up the problem:

"Libertarians often find themselves aligned with "conservatives" on issues of economic freedom-lower taxes, cutting goverment bureaucracy, easing regulations on business and looking to volunteerism and charitable giving in the private sector to provide society with a "safety net. But they side with liberals on personal tolerance, and respecting an individual's right to choose his or her lifestyle.

On the other hand, the view of most Libertarians is that Republicans and Democrats are each deplorably eager to use the force of the government as a tool of oppession against those with whom they disagree or disapprove of-either to steal thier wealth or restrict their personal freedom."


term limits would be a great start, it would end the senority structure. Interesting that term limits was the first and only thing to be ignored by the Republican revolution of 1994. So much for a contract.
 
Lobo Boy said:
... enough of us have become so disgusted with the Republicrats and Democans that if we were to grow a collective spine and vote our consciences instead of joining the bleating sheep who claim alternate parties can't win elections, well then alternate parties would start winning elections.

Wow - this is such a rational argument. [insert irony here] If all TWO or THREE DOZEN of you "squeaky wheels" who surface around here every election would band together, you still couldn't organize a successful run for dog catcher. You're always the same few, and don't even agree among yourselves what should be done. Yep, I'm jumping ship right now and joining the indies. :scrutiny:
 
I don't think third parties or independents are likely to make much headway. That's why I will probably vote Democrat this year and again in 2008. I think the Republicans have shown us they are not fit to have a monopoly on power in Washington. At least if the Democrats control one branch, maybe gridlock will result, and the neo-conservative agenda of the Republicans will be stalled.
 
good point. I don't think I could vote for Hillary, and most demos' views on gun ownership scare me, but I can't side with the Repubs because they're so whacked out these days.

I'd just like to see an even split in the congress so that "gridlock" happens and nothing too weird can be done. Any time one party gets too powerful then things get all forked up.
 
Hmm, saying what I have been saying for several years. I am happy to see another conservative in DC that is tired of the show and hasn't been gelded. The political rug needs pulling from under these change agents. Both their funding and their conservative morale support.

They are nothing more than change agents; their political lineage is the same as the "Democrats" they meet and perform with in the daily media circus, and in the ring when two of them meet every "election" time on national TV.

If there were any more important time to put the brakes on their collective geo-political agenda under global socialism run by corporate government, it is right now. Before they can arrange any more excitement somewhere in the world to distract attention from them. They are the greatest threat to our nation, culture and rights bar none.

----------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
At least if the Democrats control one branch, maybe gridlock will result, and the neo-conservative agenda of the Republicans will be stalled.

Unfortunately this is subsituting prostate cancer for lung cancer
which does nothing to remove the brain cancer inside DC. :p

Trading one sound bite for another, it's best to have a sensible conscience.

I wish the neocons could find one. Unfortunately, we have the Tin Man
until they do:

When a man's an empty kettle,
He should be on his mettle
And yet I'm torn apart.
Just because I'm presumin'
That I could be kinda human,
If I only had a heart.
I'd be tender — I'd be gentle
And awful sentimental
Regarding Love and Art
I'd be friends with sparrows
And the boy who shoots the arrows
If I only had a heart.

Neocon Tin Men: :confused:

And the boy who shoots the arrows

That would be me....

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

:evil:
 
What conservatives? The last conservative President I saw was Ronald Reagan. The last Congressmen were Bob Barr and Newt Gingrich. The last conservative Senator I saw was a Democrat-Zell Miller.

I voted for George Bush both in 2000 and 2004. I believed that both elections were close enough that just a few votes might turn the tide. I believe enough like minded people felt the same way to squeak him through.

I'm not disappointed in the results. The way he's handled the job is about what I expected before I voted in 2000 and 2004. I didn't vote for the lesser evil, I voted against Al Gore and John Kerry. If I had the choice tomorrow of casting a vote again in either election, I'd vote for Bush again.

I'm not surprised by Bush nor dismayed by Bush. Listening to his speeches. looking at his background, at the people who reared him, and his political record-what we've gotten is about what I expected.

He's not a conservative? I never thought for one instance that he was. I'm absolutely dumbfounded that there are people running around all indignant that he's not acting as a conservative should. How anyone anywhere who had watched TV, listened to radio, or broke down and read something ever thought the man (or the Republicans in Congress) was a conservative is beyond me.

All I can say about those people is an education in critical thinking might just take the blinders off.

If you are conservative, I certainly don't see how you can vote for 'neo-conservatives.' They might be neo but a cursory study of American conservatism will shortly show they are certainly not conservatives.

I can understand saying,"I'm a Republican and will support the Republican Party." But saying,"I'm a conservative and will therefore support the conservatives in the Republican Party," makes no sense. The few conservatives left in the Republican Party have been marginalized by the party power brokers.

If you want to vote for conservatives, you're either going to have to reform the Republican Party from the ground up or build a conservative party. You don't have one in the Republicans and haven't for quite some time.

The Republican Party's platform will eventuall be catastrophic for this nation. So will the Democratic Party's platform. The only difference between the two parties is the Republicans' platform will take two or three decades longer to reach the cataclysm. Maybe. It seems that the power brokers in the Republican Party are striving for parity in catastrophe with the Democrats.

In the past 34 years I've been able to justify voting for a Republican three times...in order to ensure an absolutely awful Democrat didn't get the post. The way it looks as if the Republican Party is going, I doubt I'll be able to make that justification in the next 34 years.

There's a Democrat running for Congress in South Carolina, I didn't catch his name on the radio. He's campaigning to balance the federal budget, steer more federal money into research into alternative fuels, and more federal money to protect our borders. If more Democrats start campaigns such as his, AND then follow through on the campaign rhetoric-the Republican Party is going to get its brains beaten out.
 
The Republican Party's platform will eventuall be catastrophic for this nation. So will the Democratic Party's platform. The only difference between the two parties is the Republicans' platform will take two or three decades longer to reach the cataclysm. - Byron Quick

You might want to restate this, because the actual platform documents don't say much, and the parties are not at all controlled by what the platforms say. I think what you are referring too are the projections, fair conclusions, and conspiracy theories that arise from observing what they do, promise, or don't do.

That's why Republicans as a whole are not truly conservative, and there is no such thing as a neocon, failing to meet conservative expectations. A Republican is as a Republican does, moderate in the majority but harboring a right wing that is anathema to the Democrats, who have their own far left anathema.
 
The Republican Party's platform will eventuall be catastrophic for this nation. So will the Democratic Party's platform. The only difference between the two parties is the Republicans' platform will take two or three decades longer to reach the cataclysm. Maybe. It seems that the power brokers in the Republican Party are striving for parity in catastrophe with the Democrats.

Agreed. But you're quite an optimist if you think the dissolution will take that long.

The inability of both parties to govern effectively and responsibily is already manifest. Hence the rampant cynicism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top