Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

A conservative and liberal difference

Page 6 of 7 [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Apr 2011, 12:35 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Tequila wrote:
It depends. I consider myself a conservative, but of a very classical liberal kind. One can be both a liberal and a conservative at the same time.


In the U.S. this is called libertarian.

ruveyn


holy crap. I just realized there are no classical conservatives left. 8O


No, you just seem to think the only good conservative is either a closet leftist or a dead one...


And when did jacobvirgil ever say such a thing; particularly that the only good conservative was a dead one?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

27 Apr 2011, 12:36 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Tequila wrote:
It depends. I consider myself a conservative, but of a very classical liberal kind. One can be both a liberal and a conservative at the same time.


In the U.S. this is called libertarian.

ruveyn


holy crap. I just realized there are no classical conservatives left. 8O


No, you just seem to think the only good conservative is either a closet leftist or a dead one...


There you go guessing what other people think. That is a radio talk show ploy arguing both sides.
It is a lame retorical method when people can answer you and tell you what they think.
a classical conservative defends the rights of the aristocracy modern conservatives
seem to be populists and freemarketeers. So maybe all the real conservatives are dead.
the context of my statement was yes someone could say they are a liberal and a conservative.
but only if conservative has changed in meaning in a drastic way.
I think that is has.
maybe you could have your mom read what I say and explain it to you.
and oh yeah you are an NT troll or maybe . . .
a Fanboy holy cow your a fox news fanboy :lol: .


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

27 Apr 2011, 12:40 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Tequila wrote:
It depends. I consider myself a conservative, but of a very classical liberal kind. One can be both a liberal and a conservative at the same time.


In the U.S. this is called libertarian.

ruveyn


holy crap. I just realized there are no classical conservatives left. 8O


No, you just seem to think the only good conservative is either a closet leftist or a dead one...


There you go guessing what other people think. That is a radio talk show ploy arguing both sides.
It is a lame retorical method when people can answer you and tell you what they think.
a classical conservative defends the rights of the aristocracy modern conservatives
seem to be populists and freemarketeers. So maybe all the real conservatives are dead.
the context of my statement was yes someone could say they are a liberal and a conservative.
but only if conservative has changed in meaning in a drastic way.
I think that is has.
maybe you could have your mom read what I say and explain it to you.
and oh yeah you are an NT troll or maybe . . .
a Fanboy holy cow your a fox news fanboy :lol: .


I'm making my statement based on who you were saying was an intelligent conservative in the Rush Limbaugh thread.



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

27 Apr 2011, 12:44 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Tequila wrote:
It depends. I consider myself a conservative, but of a very classical liberal kind. One can be both a liberal and a conservative at the same time.


In the U.S. this is called libertarian.

ruveyn


holy crap. I just realized there are no classical conservatives left. 8O


No, you just seem to think the only good conservative is either a closet leftist or a dead one...


There you go guessing what other people think. That is a radio talk show ploy arguing both sides.
It is a lame retorical method when people can answer you and tell you what they think.
a classical conservative defends the rights of the aristocracy modern conservatives
seem to be populists and freemarketeers. So maybe all the real conservatives are dead.
the context of my statement was yes someone could say they are a liberal and a conservative.
but only if conservative has changed in meaning in a drastic way.
I think that is has.
maybe you could have your mom read what I say and explain it to you.
and oh yeah you are an NT troll or maybe . . .
a Fanboy holy cow your a fox news fanboy :lol: .


I'm making my statement based on who you were saying was an intelligent conservative in the Rush Limbaugh thread.

really have some one read it to you and then get back to me.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


cdfox7
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,700

27 Apr 2011, 12:57 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
...a classical conservative defends the rights of the aristocracy modern conservatives
seem to be populists and freemarketeers.


The ideology of conservatism is to preserve and support traditional institutions via maintenance.
Historical it was the aristocracy may be it still is with the neo-aristocracy per se.
When theres no aristocracy, conservatives have to look to other traditional institutions to protect.



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

27 Apr 2011, 1:57 pm

To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.

There are many older Republican women who still like to say that the Republican party would be perfect if only it would get out of their uteruses.

All well documented by political historians, I believe.

The Catholic Church was firmly Democrat because of the social justice issues until abortion became a hot issue. That was in the 70's. I remember the turn; I saw it happen.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

27 Apr 2011, 4:06 pm

Great here we go again...

DW_a_mom wrote:
To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.


If the child in the womb is a person, then we are dealing with murder everytime an abortion takes place (or attempted murder if it is botched).

DW_a_mom wrote:
There are many older Republican women who still like to say that the Republican party would be perfect if only it would get out of their uteruses.


Again though, it depends on whether or not you consider the child in the womb to be a person.

DW_a_mom wrote:
All well documented by political historians, I believe.


Something you should pay attention to is the fact that historians particularly the closer you get to the present, the more biased they tend to act. Political historians especially.

DW_a_mom wrote:
The Catholic Church was firmly Democrat because of the social justice issues until abortion became a hot issue. That was in the 70's. I remember the turn; I saw it happen.


That's one of the few areas I agree with the Catholic Church on, being pro-life.



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

27 Apr 2011, 4:18 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Great here we go again...

DW_a_mom wrote:
To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.


If the child in the womb is a person, then we are dealing with murder everytime an abortion takes place (or attempted murder if it is botched).

DW_a_mom wrote:
There are many older Republican women who still like to say that the Republican party would be perfect if only it would get out of their uteruses.


Again though, it depends on whether or not you consider the child in the womb to be a person.

DW_a_mom wrote:
All well documented by political historians, I believe.


Something you should pay attention to is the fact that historians particularly the closer you get to the present, the more biased they tend to act. Political historians especially.

DW_a_mom wrote:
The Catholic Church was firmly Democrat because of the social justice issues until abortion became a hot issue. That was in the 70's. I remember the turn; I saw it happen.


That's one of the few areas I agree with the Catholic Church on, being pro-life.


yep ina we just don't get it cuz we is dum thanks for shedding light on the subject


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

27 Apr 2011, 4:19 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Great here we go again...

DW_a_mom wrote:
To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.


If the child in the womb is a person, then we are dealing with murder everytime an abortion takes place (or attempted murder if it is botched).

DW_a_mom wrote:
There are many older Republican women who still like to say that the Republican party would be perfect if only it would get out of their uteruses.


Again though, it depends on whether or not you consider the child in the womb to be a person.

DW_a_mom wrote:
All well documented by political historians, I believe.


Something you should pay attention to is the fact that historians particularly the closer you get to the present, the more biased they tend to act. Political historians especially.

DW_a_mom wrote:
The Catholic Church was firmly Democrat because of the social justice issues until abortion became a hot issue. That was in the 70's. I remember the turn; I saw it happen.


That's one of the few areas I agree with the Catholic Church on, being pro-life.


I'm not going to debate abortion. I made a note of the effect the one issue has had on the political parties and their ideology. This was a major step for the Republican party, turning away from having little interest in legislating moral issues, to taking one on full bore. It was the first in a sea change approach to government. We don't need to debate the issue itself at all to acknowledge how it started to change the political parties.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

27 Apr 2011, 4:48 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
holy crap. I just realized there are no classical conservatives left. 8O

My wife is one, possibly the only one. Of course, she calls herself a "monarchist".



psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

27 Apr 2011, 5:03 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.

Actually it goes back farther than that, to Richard Nixon's "southern strategy" in 1968. Basically he identified that the Kennedy/Johnson administration had left southern Democrats disenfranchised, and decided to pick up their votes through his stances on civil rights and international relations. That was the beginning of big government Republicans.

Recently, the Tea Party has done quite a good job at refocusing the Republicans on small government, at least on the economic side. The big Tea Party groups - Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express, and FreedomWorks - basically ignore social issues.

However, if the Republicans jettisoned their forms of social activism, they'd lose the religious right, and they couldn't afford to do that unless by some miracle upper middle class Democrats suddenly realized that their objections to government bailouts and subsidies were right in line with the Republican platform and started voting Republican. Until then, the best your friends can hope for is probably that the Republican party take a position that social legislation should be left up to the states.



cdfox7
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,700

27 Apr 2011, 5:11 pm

psychohist wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
holy crap. I just realized there are no classical conservatives left. 8O

My wife is one, possibly the only one. Of course, she calls herself a "monarchist".


I bet she'll be loving this Friday then?



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

27 Apr 2011, 5:37 pm

psychohist wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.

Actually it goes back farther than that, to Richard Nixon's "southern strategy" in 1968. Basically he identified that the Kennedy/Johnson administration had left southern Democrats disenfranchised, and decided to pick up their votes through his stances on civil rights and international relations. That was the beginning of big government Republicans.

Recently, the Tea Party has done quite a good job at refocusing the Republicans on small government, at least on the economic side. The big Tea Party groups - Tea Party Patriots, Tea Party Express, and FreedomWorks - basically ignore social issues.

However, if the Republicans jettisoned their forms of social activism, they'd lose the religious right, and they couldn't afford to do that unless by some miracle upper middle class Democrats suddenly realized that their objections to government bailouts and subsidies were right in line with the Republican platform and started voting Republican. Until then, the best your friends can hope for is probably that the Republican party take a position that social legislation should be left up to the states.


Pretty much the same time period, isn't it? Give or take a few years? I suppose the reality is that multiple forces were working to make the change ...


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Apr 2011, 7:51 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Great here we go again...

DW_a_mom wrote:
To me, classical conservatism was small federal government. That went out the window when religious groups decided the Republican party was the better vehicle for anti-abortion legislation, which had to be dealt with on a broader level once the Surpreme Court weighed in. Federal legislation is not small federal government.


If the child in the womb is a person, then we are dealing with murder everytime an abortion takes place (or attempted murder if it is botched).

DW_a_mom wrote:
There are many older Republican women who still like to say that the Republican party would be perfect if only it would get out of their uteruses.


Again though, it depends on whether or not you consider the child in the womb to be a person.

DW_a_mom wrote:
All well documented by political historians, I believe.


Something you should pay attention to is the fact that historians particularly the closer you get to the present, the more biased they tend to act. Political historians especially.

DW_a_mom wrote:
The Catholic Church was firmly Democrat because of the social justice issues until abortion became a hot issue. That was in the 70's. I remember the turn; I saw it happen.


That's one of the few areas I agree with the Catholic Church on, being pro-life.


yep ina we just don't get it cuz we is dum thanks for shedding light on the subject


As I recall, before Reagan turned the abortion issue into a Republican party plank, abortion was largely a non-partisan issue. Jesse Jackson was a pro-life liberal, and George W. Bush was a pro-choice conservative.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

27 Apr 2011, 8:21 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
As I recall, before Reagan turned the abortion issue into a Republican party plank, abortion was largely a non-partisan issue. Jesse Jackson was a pro-life liberal, and George W. Bush was a pro-choice conservative.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Not really non-partisan, just not planked. It may not have been in the platform, but I remember after mass in the late 70's people were giving out single issue voter guides that said to vote for pro-life candidates, which all happened to be Republican. My mother was furious! Lol, she's a registered Republican with a socialist heart; can't think of the last time she actually voted Republican.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

28 Apr 2011, 3:09 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
As I recall, before Reagan turned the abortion issue into a Republican party plank, abortion was largely a non-partisan issue. Jesse Jackson was a pro-life liberal, and George W. Bush was a pro-choice conservative.

Even Reagan was an "I'll never do it" pro-lifer, not a "you should never do it" pro-lifer. Don't forget he appointed O'Connor, who was instrumental in keeping the court on the pro-choice side for decades.

You must mean George H.W. Bush, the older guy, right? I think George W. Bush was pretty clearly not pro-choice; don't forget he's the one who prohibited use of new stem cell lines from aborted fetuses in research. His entire campaign strategy turned on getting out vote of the religious right.