Skip to main content

View Diary: "Guiding assumptions" of American governance (171 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  First off, it's not conservatives or (8+ / 0-)

    conservatism.

    The destruction of economic stability and the capitalist system is not what conservatives were after. The massive redistribution of wealth to the upper classes does not foster conservatism.

    This new economic paradigm favors the wealthy, but it's not conservatism in the classic sense, as the very fabric of marketplace is being destroyed.

    It's the antithesis of conservatism, where one wants to have stability, the ability to plan for the future, and have reasonable expectations.

    Using the word 'conservative' to describe these greedy people who care not about future generations is lending them a credence they do not deserve.

    http://onenationworkingtogether.org/

    by shpilk on Thu Sep 02, 2010 at 09:10:38 AM PDT

    •  I agree, but it's what they call themselves. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy, JG in MD

      The term "conservative" may be undergoing a shift in meaning.  What is most interesting is that they have to keep going back to Reagan, because they certainly can't hold up either Bush as examples of great governance.  And yet it is Reagan's policies - as carried to fruition by the Bushmen - that have gotten us in the mess we are trying to deal with now.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site