Skip to main content

View Diary: I agree with The American Conservative. Wait, what? (241 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I miss the old genuine conservatives from the post (50+ / 0-)

    war era,  maybe even through Goldwater. They were people you could argue with with courtesy, and come to actual compromise.  They had useful ideas then that even when you found them misguided, offered a different perspective that shouldn't be ignored.  There are very few conservatives anymore, and I actually resent, in the name of this nearly extinct political species, the people who appropriated that label by hostile takeover of the GOP.  Not to mention the country's economy.  

    The oligarchs are like the old-time magnates of the robber baron era who hired thugs to break up unions, only this time the thugs are in Congress and statehouses.

    Real plastic here; none of that new synthetic stuff made from chicken feathers. By the morning of 9/12/2001 the people of NYC had won the War on Terror.

    by triplepoint on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 06:04:30 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  This. (23+ / 0-)

      I would have no problem voting for a conservative if I thought he was the better of two candidates.... If I could believe that his/her policies were beneficial to the country as a whole. Instead, we're left with 'conservatives' whose concepts of fiscal responsibility are cutting programs for the poor to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

      In my lifetime, I don't think the title of conservative has ever stood for real conservative policies.

    •  Not only could you "argue with them," (30+ / 0-)

      but they actually put forth some pretty solid, rational ideas that one could and should support.

      These fucking dystopian fairy tale-felching radical extremists running the alleged "conservative" party today are not conservatives.  They are fucking freaks.


      by GOPGO2H3LL on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:32:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I have long posited that we are the true (10+ / 0-)

        conservatives now.  Certainly in the context of 'American values'.  I tend to style myself as a left-leaning Eisenhower Republican, meaning that I am far to the left of most of the Democrats in Congress, and certainly to left of the Obama administration.  The GOP has gone so far around the bend that they are the new extreme left---the bomb-throwing anarchists of the late 19th-early 20th centuries.  I wonder if they can even claim to be right wing anymore.

        I tend to see politics as a kind of great wheel where (in this era at least) everything is moving to the right, and the most extreme on the right disappear off our vision and reappear up on the fringe of the left edge.  We need to resist this rightward tendency and stake a firm claim on at least the middle, throwing out an anchor to save us from going any further right.  And maybe the Tea Party GOP will find themselves in limbo, out of sight, out of mind, on the far side of that  stopped wheel, just to dwindle and fade out of human memory.

        Real plastic here; none of that new synthetic stuff made from chicken feathers. By the morning of 9/12/2001 the people of NYC had won the War on Terror.

        by triplepoint on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:30:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I've been saying for a while that (8+ / 0-)

          we are the true conservatives. The
          GOP of today is out to destroy, not to conserve. They are the party of radical change.
          Amazing that they can convince 30% of voters that Obama is the candidate of radical change.

          The founding fathers knew of the mutually corrupting influences of Church and state, wisely sending them to opposite corners.

          by emidesu on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:48:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  this is true, and a problem for many of us (15+ / 0-)

          who aren't conservative.

          I have long posited that we are the true conservatives now.
          One of a thousand problems with the degeneration of the GOP into its current poisonous absurdity (theocratic Ayn Randians) is that it has pushed the Democratic Party far to the right. The front page here frequently celebrates the fact that many of Obama's positions are in fact positions developed or promoted by Republicans (Romneycare  / Obamacare being the great example, but the career of Tim Geithner being another), which everybody should find thoroughly depressing.
          •  Indeed I do. (8+ / 0-)

            We're ALL better off when we're ALL better off!

            by susanWAstate on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 09:37:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Democrats aren't conservative (4+ / 0-)

            At the moment, the Democratic Party doesn't even have a coherent ideological foundation; its purpose is to attempt to represent the interests and ideas of everyone who isn't sociopathic, malevolent, or batshit fucking psycho. It basically invites anyone who's interested in any sort of legitimate problem-solving effort, regardless of ideological inclination.

            Of course, that doesn't eliminate the need for debate among the various ideologies; the debate and compromise process simply happens internally.

            So the result is a party with some conservative ideas (protect and restore assorted laws and regulations); some liberal ideas (universal healthcare, DADT repeal, the DREAM Act); some neoliberal ideas (private health insurance inclusion in UHC, free trade); and even some libertarian ideas (drug law reform, reproductive freedom, marriage equality). Nobody really agrees with the whole package.

            Basically, if you let Democrats run the country completely and totally unchecked, the result would be essentially what you would expect if we had a functioning representative democracy.

            "Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines." - Sgt. Maj Michael Barrett on DADT repeal

            by kyril on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 12:29:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  "At the moment, the Democratic Party doesn't even (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              have a coherent ideological foundation;"


              "It's purpose is to attempt to represent the interests and ideas of everyone who isn't sociopathic, malevolent, or batshit fucking psycho."

              False.  It's purpose is to get reelected, and it counts on the people you listed to help it.

              "Basically, if you let Democrats run the country completely and totally unchecked, the result would be essentially what you would expect if we had a functioning representative democracy."

              False again.  Unchecked, they would run amok, as much as any Republicans.

              It's going to be a full time job trying to get them to work for us.

              When banjos are outlawed, only outlaws will have banjos.

              by Bisbonian on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:20:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It wasn't all that long ago (2+ / 0-)

              that the idea of the Democrats as the big tent party was fairly novel, and worth celebrating. A big tent is how you get your party into power. But if your tent is so big that it's trying to simultaneously contain Louise Slaughter and Heath Shuler, Kirsten Gillibrand and Joe Manchin, you're no longer representing any defined ideology. You're the Sane Party, and your members will have very different, and divisive, ideas of what "sane" means.

              "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

              by sidnora on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 07:43:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  They're right-wing all the way. (0+ / 0-)

          What they believe is simple.  Religion and religious institutions should have the power to dictate life to us, not some secular government.

          Absolute economic freedom.  No social freedom.  It's consistent, even if it is painfully regressive.  It's right-wing still.  Remember, the Ron Paul people were shut out.

      •  GI Bill (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Calamity Jean, kyril

        Wasn't the GI Bill initially the brain child of two Republicans? Arguable one of the most important post WW2 policies to shape the latter half of the 20th Century.  That party is long, long gone.

        "It looks like how music sounds." --My four year old nephew upon looking through a kaleidoscope for the first time

        by Mote Dai on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 08:43:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Watching Leverage the other night (6+ / 0-)

      I heard a phrase I didn't expect ... the brains of the Leverage team suggesting to a mob boss that they talk in private "like gentlemen."

      This while fending off what amounted to a gunbattle, in which (as usual) the Leverage team had come in armed with ... almost anything but guns.

      Once upon a time, in places other than the halls of the Senate and House, American conservatives referred to their opponents as gentlemen (and more rarely as gentlewomen). Today's conservatives sneer and snarl -- just like today's ranting preachers who could care less about the poor, the sick, the disenfranchised, the needful, never even mind the Saviour they're supposed to be extolling their congregations to follow and act like -- even within their own houses of worship.

      It's almost like some sort of psychosis. They're not happy unless they can spit on somebody else.

      LBJ, Lady Bird, Anne Richards, Barbara Jordan, Sully Sullenberger, Ike, Drew Brees, Molly Ivins --Texas is no Bush league! -7.50,-5.59

      by BlackSheep1 on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 09:39:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They mostly just do that in public. (0+ / 0-)

        They only do that in public.  In private, they have discussions.  It's just the rhetorical venom they spew has kind of caught up with them and some people who believe it are starting to be in charge.

    •  The party of wild delusions and madness. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The old-style conservatives still had an understanding of reality and facts.  There was a debate one could have about policy, the debate is good and it's important.  It needs to be had, and now it happens solely in the democratic party.

      The new style of the GOP is more about presumption of facts, starting at assumptions and working policy backwards from there.  It's a presumptive approach to political thought.  People disagree with you because they're secretly evil, so you can't compromise with them.

      It seems that the old-style of conservatives provoked this on themselves by appealing to a religious (and bigoted) base.  They told the religious that the other party was trying to get them, and concocted fantasies to that end.

      Eventually, the deluded religious masses grew so convinced of their own righteousness that they came to dominate the party.  Like an out of control fire, it's now burning all of us.  The wild rantings of madmen have more credibility that educated, reasoned minds.  They spend their time flailing madly at demons.

      Not that there aren't other problems in our political system, and there are big ones, but I tend to see this as symptomatic of a politics mingling with religion.

      Either way it doesn't really matter how we got here.  Now we have a party of facts and a party of genuflection before the madness that is the incomprehensible divinity of the cosmos.  I just hope their madness is apparent enough to the general public for them to become politically obsolete.

    •  Ha... they failed because they were good... just (0+ / 0-)

      like old line Protestant churches have been superceded in the marketing and market share by the fundies. they were too caught up in being good Christians instead of pandering to greed and the rich and the angry and fearful... So of course rewarding good solid common sense steady as you go policies meant that oldline conservatives were blown out of the water by the well funded crazies who know how to fire up the tent meeting with that old time hate and fear and greed religion side of conservatism... the grab the money and feast wing always wins if it is allowed to rewrite the rules and reshape their base.

      Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

      by IreGyre on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 01:54:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  old conservative brought it on themselves (0+ / 0-)

      When they assented to the Nixon "southern strategy" of using racism and class division. They assumed that with their superior positions in society and big money they would always control the 'rubes' whose votes they courted. They never dreamed that come the 21st century the anti-science, anti-education, racist, religious fundamentalists would take over their party from top to bottom.

      Today even the ranks of the powerful and super-wealthy are infused with far, far right nuts who fund the most outrageous politicians they can find. They have turned the GOP into the WPP(white peoples party) and plan to use it to rule and loot the country.

      Todays oligarchy is interested in raw power for themselves and are bent on distroying the middle class to gain that power. It's called Facism. A system whereby a small powerful elite use a disgruntled mass of racists and thugs to enforce power over an entire country. They control the wealth of a nation and use it to further their own agenda and not that of the nation.

      The good old conservatives of so many white peoples dreams are to blame for what they wrought on the nation. I have no longing for their return.

      America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

      by cacamp on Tue Sep 04, 2012 at 06:09:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site