If conservatives want to become relevant to the present

Post Reply New Topic

http://ygnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Room-To-Grow.pdf

A collection of essays by conservatives outlining the problems with the current state of Republican and conservative affairs and what needs to happen.

It is pretty lengthy, so I'll sum it up:
We need reforms across the entire government and business world in order to strengthen the middle class and reduce cronyism, which will in turn spur economic growth.

I'm not a USian, but to me it seems the first thing they should do is kick out the loonies. Seriously, if someone in your party is claiming the temperature on Mars is the same as on earth, don't you think that damages the image of the party in anyone who is not an idiot? I could not vote for a party that keeps people like that around.

/\ Both parties have loonies but neither party will admit that they need to do some house cleaning. When it's always the other guy who's worse and no self-analysys nothing will get better.
Also, the term "loonie" itself is too arbitrary.

By what that guy said about Mars, he is a looney in my book. I'm not denying there are loonies in the other party too. If were a USian I'd have real difficulty voting for either party. I think an increasing number of Americans no longer identify as Democrat or Republic but as Independants.
I think I'm mostly classical liberal/moderate libertarian. I don't think there is a party for that.

I have to wonder why always so much focus on 'the middle class' as if all that exists is the very wealthy and the middle class and everything else is irrelevent. I guess my more progressive mindset tells me getting rid of economic classes altogether would be a better thing to strive for.

I'd say they are misinformed about temperatures of planets, not really sure how it would be relevent to politics or government policy that they are misinformed about that. Though I am willing to bet Mars is much colder since it doesn't have much of a physical atmosphere..........It would disturb me more if a politician said something like ' temporary martial law is needed in order to cleanse this nation of the garbage.' or 'we should send the homeless to death camps'.

Also I thought loony was another one of those terms for crazy, mad, insane or whatever you'd want to call it, and being ignorant about the tempature of mars vs tempature on earth just doesn't fit that in my mind.

It used to be that the Republicans would primarily champion the middle class and the Democrats would primarily champion the poor. It had its flaws, but that system seemed to work a lot better than the way the Republicans now call anything that could harm the wealthiest in this country "class warfare."

The problem with that Mars statement was that this person was either a congressman or senator who had a seat in a government committee on climate change. You'd expect someone who takes up that position should have at least some basic knowledge, preferably more. This guy owns some oil related business and is a climate change denier. If a party lets someone like that be their spokesman on climate change, I call that looney. You don't send a completely ignorant person to debate scientists.
And you are right, Mars barely has an atmosphere and it's terribly cold out there.

The other things you mention are horrible too of course. Or that guy last year who said that women could not get pregnant from "legitemate rape". I think political parties should do some housecleaning and kick them out of the party. Let them go at it alone if they want.

Both parties should do some "senate-cleaning" while they're at it.

In that context I can see that being an issue, maybe....though I'd have to know what the context of the exact comment was, but if they are over-all ignorant on the topic they should not be debating people who have knowledge on the topic.

It was the owner of a mining company complaining about the EPA restrictions. His argument was this:

1. Mars doesn't have coal mines
2. Mars is the same temperature as Earth

Which proves
1. Climate change is a myth
2. I shouldn't have any extra expenses to reduce my company's pollution rate

Yes faulty logic indeed....though my personal perspective is climate change is by no means a myth, however I think even without humans the climate would still change since it has many times in history. However that is not to say humans are not contributing...I suppose I am a bit more concerned about what pollution does to the air quality since I have to breath the air either way I think more sustainable fuel options that don't contribute to problems on this planet would be a good thing to move towards.

But yeah basically even if their pollution rate had no effect on climate change per say....it should still be reduced due to screwing with the quality of air people have to breath, so either way I'd say they have no ground to stand on with an argument like that.

I think it is because the middle class is considered responsible for a large amount of demand and consumer spending. The poorest people cannot afford to spend much money, and the wealthiest few % do not spend their money: someone who has some money may buy a new phone, but someone who is 1000 times as wealthy will not buy a 1000 phones.
One of the reasons this crisis has been going on for this long is lack of consumer demand. If poor people could be lifted out of poverty and turned into middle class people, that would be a good thing for those people and for the economy.

I think that is a pretty simplified way of looking at politics in America, I think it has always been playing the competing interests of one particular group against the others be it the poor versus the middle class, minorities versus whites, Catholics versus Protestants, social conservatives versus social liberals, north versus south, etc., etc. All it is just trying to get 50% +1 of the people engaged enough to vote to be on your side. It's hard not to be totally cynical about the whole process at this point, it's all done thru fear or promising things they cannot deliver. The American people don't actually control their government, there is a ruling class that just herds them into one camp to another to maintain their power.

One thing the right has to admit before they drift into irrelevance is that the country does not consist of just white, southern, heterosexual, religiously conservative men. When Cochran appealed to blacks in Mississippi, just as the RNC had suggested Republican elected officials should do, all of a sudden conservatives jumped on his back defending the racist tea bagger he beat.

It is an oversimplification. But it used to be that more often than not, the secondary beneficiaries (the wealthy being #1 for both parties) of their policies were in those two categories. The Republican party no longer endorses the middle class, and instead only focuses on class warfare and how taxing the wealthiest any more would destroy the country. And guns and God.