New Election 2008 thread

[bjorn_skurj]

Don't forget their dealings with the Illuminatti.

Ewige Blumenkraft!

[Guest Cousin Tupelo]

I have never met a Hitler. I imagine that most Hitlers have changed their name by now.

 

Mr. Hilter

 

[bjorn_skurj]

Mr. Hilter

 

[Guest Cousin Tupelo]

 

Soon, baby!

[lamradio]

guilty

 

just don't call me a republican.

 

And I thought I was the only one on the board. Well, I think there's maybe one or two more conservatives.

 

[MrRain422]

Hey resident conservatives,

 

Just curious what you all think of Bob Barr's candidacy.

[Guest Cousin Tupelo]

Hey resident conservatives,

 

Just curious what you all think of Bob Barr's candidacy.

 

... at least it's not Rosanne?

[bleedorange]

Not really sure about the middle class, but if they do rise, I expect it won't be by much, and personally I don't mind paying taxes if the money is being spent well

 

 

I've never understood this sentiment. MY wife and I work hard to provide for our family, pay the mortgage, make car payments, pay the bills, etc. We don't make that much money and yet 20-25% goes directly to the government for many needless, poorly-run government programs.

 

Maybe I should default on my many loans and just wait for the federal government to come in and bail me out.

[uncle wilco]

Hey resident conservatives,

 

Just curious what you all think of Bob Barr's candidacy.

 

not much really.

 

sorry i don't have more of an in depth answer on that. he's just serving as this years potential perot or nader. someone other than the "big two" to vote for that happens to have a face with a name, but not much else. i don't expect him to have much of an impact.

[Moe_Syzlak]

Hey resident conservatives,

 

How do you define "conservative" anymore? I would probably most closely align myself with Lincoln's brand of republicanism, but most would call me "liberal" as a result.... although I don't really know what "liberal" means anymore either.

[lost highway]

What is richly ironic is that the classic (and respectable) conservative economic agenda is to tax as little as possible. Have the government spend less. (I myself am a bit of a socialist, but I can see how this could be the most rational approach.) George W. and I believe to a lesser degree McCain are so military obsessed there are countless billions spent on fancy death machines. But right wingers smile as other more useful programs are cut to save hard working American's dollars.

 

If you invest in education, public health (including reproductive education and affordable if not free birth control) and culture you will get stability and prosperity. If you invest in war you will get death and disorder. I know that boarders on glib, but it is so relevant sometimes I feel it is necessary to reiterate the concept.

[bleedorange]

What is richly ironic is that the classic (and respectable) conservative economic agenda is to tax as little as possible. Have the government spend less. (I myself am a bit of a socialist, but I can see how this could be the most rational approach.) George W. and I believe to a lesser degree McCain are so military obsessed there are countless billions spent on fancy death machines. But right wingers smile as other more useful programs are cut to save hard working American's dollars.

 

If you invest in education, public health (including reproductive education and affordable if not free birth control) and culture you will get stability and prosperity. If you invest in war you will get death and disorder. I know that boarders on glib, but it is so relevant sometimes I feel it is necessary to reiterate the concept.

 

 

National security is one of the cornerstone ideals of conservatism. Plus, it is one of the few things that the federal government was, actually, originally responsible for going back to the Constitution

[uncle wilco]

Hey resident conservatives,

 

How do you define "conservative" anymore? I would probably most closely align myself with Lincoln's brand of republicanism, but most would call me "liberal" as a result.... although I don't really know what "liberal" means anymore either.

 

con

[bleedorange]

that's pretty much it. it really doesn't exist in washington anymore, certainly not in the republican party. but it could see a comeback if an Obama administration doesn't deliver and a decent conservative candidate emerges. currently there are no such candidates on my radar that have any passion to do so.

 

 

Unfortunately, this is a 100% true statement. No matter how badly McCain wants to pretend to be.

[Edie]

Dear Uncle Wilco:

 

So what happened?

 

as i see it:

 

the republicans abandoned conservative principles with their political victories, which had given them a sense of entitlement. they arrogantly decided to move the political fence to create a bigger political yard for themselves. they worked to attract moderates in a foolish power grab and alienated true conservatives (such as me) from their ranks and caused many to leave the party. what passes as the GOP now is a total joke. republicans sabotaged themselves with greed and corruption.

 

we then get bush spending our money like a teenager with his dad's credit card and a war we had no business starting. we get bigger government and a blind eye turned towards our nations economy.

 

THAT my friends, is NOT conservatism. the conservative philosophy is not to blame. what is to blame for the last 8 years is the ineptness of those running the GOP. but it sure would help if the democrats had a freakin' plan. i'm so pissed off at the GOP, i'll pretty much agree to almost anything but what the Huckabee's and the Romney's of the world have to offer.

 

therefore, Obama is getting my serious consideration. the two party system has long been broken.

[Moe_Syzlak]

that's pretty much it. it really doesn't exist in washington anymore, certainly not in the republican party. but it could see a comeback if an Obama administration doesn't deliver and a decent conservative candidate emerges. currently there are no such candidates on my radar that have any passion to do so.

Okay given that, I assume you would NOT be a fan of Lincoln Republicanism then? I'm glad you recognize that the GOP is NOT conservative. I find it ironic that a lot of folks in the GOP point to "the party of Lincoln" as a badge of honor when I would argue the GOP resembles Lincoln's ideals far less than, say, Obama.

[uncle wilco]

Unfortunately, this is a 100% true statement. No matter how badly McCain wants to pretend to be.

 

mccain almost bolted the republican party (twice). he's consistently undermined conservative principles and has generally been a malcontent among his party. and yet, there he is...their nominee.

 

i'm sure he's loving this.

[uncle wilco]

Dear Uncle Wilco:

 

So what happened?

 

in january of this year i fully intended to find reasons to support obama. i spent a lot of time blogging and researching as much as i could and determined that as likeable a guy he most likely is, i just couldn't accept his stances on the issues. i also have serious reservations about those who he has sought counsel with. i'm just not comfortable throwing aside what i believe for a personality. and barack has got personality moreso than any politician i've seen in decades. i'm not completely surprised he defeated hillary, but i think i'm even more surprised that the republicans couldn't come up with someone better than a 72 year-old dinosaur.

 

maybe this (a barack victory) is what is needed to wake conservatism from it's coma. because the republicans just don't get it. i'd just rather that it wouldn't have to come to that. i'd prefer 4 years of mccain until someone gets the cojones to run a successful conservative campaign (whether it's a repub or a 3rd party....i don't care).

[Beltmann]

Can anyone speak intelligently to this blog or this rumored rant tape? A friend just sent it to me. Is this some stupid HRC supporter with a blog stirring up nonsense, or is this for real? Oh man.

 

http://hillbuzz.blogspot.com/2008/06/whats...-rant-tape.html

I'm increasingly convinced that it's a hoax. Here's an interesting piece, by a blogger at the National Review Online, no less:

 

Why Does the Michelle Obama Tape Rumor Match a 2006 Novel?

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Okay given that, I assume you would NOT be a fan of Lincoln Republicanism then? I'm glad you recognize that the GOP is NOT conservative. I find it ironic that a lot of folks in the GOP point to "the party of Lincoln" as a badge of honor when I would argue the GOP resembles Lincoln's ideals far less than, say, Obama.

Just as ironic as the Democrats proclaiming themselves to be the heirs of Jefferson.

[Moe_Syzlak]

Just as ironic as the Democrats proclaiming themselves to be the heirs of Jefferson.

You'll get no argument from me there.As I said earlier, I think both labels -- conservative and liberal -- as worn by the major parties are laughable. The whole thing is a just a big us vs them which is why I said earlier in the week that less divisiveness is a big thing for me. Neither side has a monopoly on good ideas, but in this us vs them culture, it seems we'd rather fail as a country than have our "rivals" succeed.

[Good Old Neon]

I've never understood this sentiment. MY wife and I work hard to provide for our family, pay the mortgage, make car payments, pay the bills, etc. We don't make that much money and yet 20-25% goes directly to the government for many needless, poorly-run government programs.

 

True, but the taxes you pay helped create and maintain the infrastructure that make it possible for you to work hard and support your family - pay the mortgage, make car payments, pay the bills, etc. Because it only takes a moment's thought to realize that without government you wouldn't be able to have those earnings at all. Society has to pay for a government to enforce law and order and to provide infrastructure for materials to be transported and communications to take place. To educate the employees who are going to work and so on.

 

The idea that somehow it is your money, you have right to it, and the government has to give it back is itself contributing to a kind of mythical idea that we are all rugged independent settlers, frontiersmen making our living from gathering the berries in the woods and then the government comes along and says, well, you've gathered all those berries, I want some of them. And yet the government didn't have anything to do with your gathering them. Obviously that is a myth. There is nothing like that that is going on. I think that this very handy slogan was really an attempt to get people to think in a simplistic and indefensible way about tax.

 

Maybe I should default on my many loans and just wait for the federal government to come in and bail me out.

 

Or, you could found a company or create an industry, run it irresponsibly, break all sorts of laws and regulations, accept corporate welfare, run the company into the ground and then ask the rest of us to bail you out.

[bleedorange]

True, but the taxes you pay helped create and maintain the infrastructure that make it possible for you to work hard and support your family - pay the mortgage, make car payments, pay the bills, etc. Because it only takes a moment's thought to realize that without government you wouldn't be able to have those earnings at all. Society has to pay for a government to enforce law and order and to provide infrastructure for materials to be transported and communications to take place. To educate the employees who are going to work and so on.

 

The idea that somehow it is your money, you have right to it, and the government has to give it back is itself contributing to a kind of mythical idea that we are all rugged independent settlers, frontiersmen making our living from gathering the berries in the woods and then the government comes along and says, well, you've gathered all those berries, I want some of them. And yet the government didn't have anything to do with your gathering them. Obviously that is a myth. There is nothing like that that is going on. I think that this very handy slogan was really an attempt to get people to think in a simplistic and indefensible way about tax.

 

Or, you could found a company or create an industry, run it irresponsibly, break all sorts of laws and regulations, accept corporate welfare, run the company into the ground and then ask the rest of us to bail you out.

 

 

I love how you use extremes to make your points a lot of times. Obviously, taxes are a necessary part of an ordered society for just the things you mentioned. These can take many forms, such as state sales taxes, fees for drivers licenses and car registrations, etc., along with a federal income tax.

 

My point was merely that we're already paying a quarter of our income to the federal government (thankfully I live in Texas), and in order to pay for all these campaign promises and benefits, tax cuts will be rolled back, then taxes will be increased, and I'm going to be paying more. And I'm not supposed to mind this.

[bobbob1313]

The way I look at it, how can anyone logically support cutting taxes and increasing spending? If you cut taxes, you have to decrease spending. If you increase taxes, you should increase spending.

 

Is my math wrong here?

[bleedorange]

The way I look at it, how can anyone logically support cutting taxes and increasing spending?

 

 

Who does? Well, besides our current president that is.