The case for conservatism

Lance McMillian's picture

Conservatism recognizes the limits of human ability. Each of us is flawed in our own unique way. My shortcomings mean that I should not rule over you; your shortcomings mean that you should not rule over me. Still, some civil order is necessary to keep the peace. Left to our own devices, we would devour one another in a world without government.

But the very impulses that require government in the first instance also caution against allowing it to grow too big. Too much power in too few hands is too tempting for those who wield it. The Founders recognized this danger and designed the federal government in a way to protect most spheres of life from the reach of central authority. The key insight of the Founders still resonates today: people must be allowed the freedom to govern themselves.

Freedom, however, is a choice. To flourish, it requires specific policies and practices. Three tenets that underlie conservatism form the basis of a free society: a respect for private property rights; support for free markets and free trade; and a belief in God.

First, without private property protections, ballot booth democracy tantalizes as a tool of class envy. When voters are free to take whatever they want and give it to the government for everyone to share, the freedom of the individual loses its enduring character and instead becomes a preference subject to democratic whim.

This is dangerous ground to tread because ownership of private property has always served as a bulwark against centralized tyranny. It was the landowners who forced King John to sign the Magna Carta in 1215, which was the first document in the Western world to protect individual rights.

History also shows that when property rights weaken, government-sanctioned oppression grows. Collectivists believe that everyone should happily be on the same page – i.e., their page. When that unity cannot be achieved through persuasion, force is the next option. The formula throughout the world is well-established: collectivism today, the silencing of dissent tomorrow.

Second, society works best when economic affairs are conducted with limited government interference. While free markets are not perfect by any stretch, they do allow individuals to order their lives along the lines they see fit. Experience demonstrates that this is the shortest and most promising path to prosperity.

Social planners, however, believe in their ability to solve society’s problems. This is a typical human conceit. Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s recently-departed chief of staff, perfectly captured this mindset when he said, “Rule One: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.”

Words such as these make conservatives shudder. The complexities of the world cannot be solved by people in the White House – Democrat or Republican – making decisions for the rest of us. Indeed, the bigger the solution crafted in the halls of government, the greater the unintended negative consequences caused by that solution. Reality rarely bends to the centralized planner’s will.

Too much government intervention in free markets also increases the power of the lobbying industrial complex. As government grows, so grows the number of those who seek to use the state for their own personal advantage – be it big business, unions, or anyone else with enough money to buy special favor. The cesspool of interest groups that pollute Washington, D.C., testifies to this truth.

In this regard, George Orwell in “Animal Farm” famously wrote, “All pigs are created equal, except some pigs are more equal than others.” Big government helps to perpetuate this type of legalized inequality because it invariably favors those who seek to fatten themselves at government’s trough.

Finally, conservatism believes that faith in God is essential to preserving liberty. Morality originates from superhuman instincts prompted by an Almighty Being. When the human race loses touch with this spiritual element, society suffers as men and women feel emboldened to live selfish lives without any accountability to a higher power.

As immorality rises in this manner, freedom suffers. The social breakdowns caused by violent crime, broken families, business fraud, and the like create a demand for action, which typically means greater state intervention at the expense of the individual.

Maintaining a connection to God is the only means to forestall this moral decline. In the words of Patrick Henry, “Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue.”

This type of religious devotion cannot be imposed by the state. It comes from within. And therein lies both great hope and risk. The first line of defense of freedom always begins with the person in the mirror.

[Lance McMillian, a Fayette County resident, is a law professor at Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School, where he teaches constitutional law.]

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Conservatism

McMillan left out a few elements of conservatism in America:

Many Conservatives supported England and George III during the American Revolution--migrating to England or Canada. Those were not "conservatives" taking part in the tea party in Boston.

Conservatives were the defenders of slavery (part of their defense of private property) and took America into the Civil War.

Conservatives supported Jim Crow laws during the worst period in the history of the South.

Conservatives opposed abolishing child labor.

Conservatives opposed the 40-hour week.

Conservatives opposed unions which brought the American dream to middle class workers.

Conservatives opposed women's right to vote.

Conservatives opposed Social Security.

Conservatives opposed Medicare.

Conservatives defended school segregation.

Conservatives opposed voting rights for African Americans.

Conservatives opposed desegregation of public facilities.

Conservatives have been anti-science--denying evolution and global warming.

Conservatives have denied a woman's right to control her own body despite their claim to defend liberty.

And the claim to fiscal responsibility by conservatives is also such nonsense. Bush's two wars that were not paid for--just borrow more from China but never ask Americans to pay a war tax.

I could go on and on but why bother.

Conservatism is government by the comfortable, never asking Americans for sacrifice, and lies.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
lion: "Conservative" Democrats or Republicans?

Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have both played both sides of the fence as "liberals" and "conservatives"; however, here are a few significant excerpts (from an oversimplification) courtesy of Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)

The Republican party was founded in northern states in 1854 by anti-slavery activists, modernizers, ex-Whigs and ex-Free Soilers, the Republican Party quickly became the principal opposition to the dominant Democratic Party. It first came to power in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency and oversaw the American Civil War and Reconstruction. ... The party's founding members chose the name "Republican Party" in the mid-1850s in part as homage to the name initially used by Thomas Jefferson's party. The name comes from an editorial by Horace Greeley published in June 1854. It echoes the 1776 republican values of civic virtue and opposition to aristocracy and corruption. ... Most Republicans agree there should be a "safety net" to assist the less fortunate; however, they tend to believe the private sector is more effective in helping the poor than government is; as a result, Republicans support giving government grants to faith-based and other private charitable organizations to supplant welfare spending. ... Compared with Democrats, many Republicans believe in a more robust version of federalism with greater limitations placed upon federal power and a larger role reserved for the States.

Oh, and lion:

http://www.congresslink.org/civilrights/1964.htm

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

Regardless, I lump all major party candidates in to one big pile of dung.

As far as I am concerned both major "parties" are replete with lying scum and belong in the review mirror of history.

By the way, my political philosophy is founded on 'common sense' and I have no major party affiliation.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
JohnnyBeGood
Quote:

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

Check your history - and note what states these 'Democrats' were from. They were affectionately??? called Dixiecrats - and after Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act - the solid Democratic south became 'Republican' - not exactly the Party of Lincoln.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
My history? If there is an error- point it out.

Are you saying there is an inaccuracy in this? If so, where?
Please don't generalize. Be specific. "Check your history" infers an error.

The fact that many of the racist Democrats were from the south doesn't change any of the facts. Some democrats like Robert Byrd were Klansman.

So the minorities that are conservative and affiliated with the Republicans are self hating racists?

How do you develop all of these broad scoped generalizations?

If YOU "check your history" you might find that political philosophy isn't all about race - only racists are.

Perhaps you are too old to move beyond racial issues. If so, I hate it for you because racism is a heavy burden to carry and you would be so much better off and happier to grow beyond a one dimensional interpretation of all things political.

In case you missed it, America elected an African American President (not the 13% of African-Americans either sister) and success, including millions in rewards, permeates all of societies 'sub-groups' (irrespective of gender and race) that offers a product that we are buying - the problem for you is, we "ain't" buying a chip on the shoulder DM. Come on mom, just let it go and see the multitude of other issues NOT related to race that exist.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
JBGood

You brought 'race' into the discussion by citing Civil Rights activities since 1933. I think maybe the 'chip' is heavy on your shoulder. (and not just about 'race') There are too many people, young and old, in Fayette County who are dealing with humans just fine - and without regard to 'race' as some type of litmus test. . .but white and black are remaining vigilant so that we don't slip back into 'bad habits'.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
JohnnyB Good

As long as you try to credit southern Republicans for the implementation of non-racist activities in the history of the South, you will be corrected. In case you missed it - we are still dealing with racism from the shores of California to the Mississippi Gulf. No one is more aware of the progress that has been made in this country (and certainly Fayette County) than a Black woman over 70. The very fact that I am enjoying my retirement in Fayette County just 29 years after my son was told not to get caught here after dark is a testament to the progress! Obama being elected president has not erased the racist attitudes in this country. WHEN JOHNSON SIGNED THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT - the solid Dixecrats (Democrats) of the south switched to the Republican Party. I don't have a 'chip' - but I lived through what you call 'history' - and it should not be contaminated by your desire to have the ugliness of racism erased or incorrectly reported. READ WHAT JOHNSON SAID WHEN HE SIGNED THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
JBGood

If you have the time, read The Help. Gives some insight into black/white relations in the South.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Lion......better get used to it

or you could move to your favorite Socialist Country. Pick one. Right now they all have a bunch of openings. Everyone else is leaving.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Defense of Conservatives - Lion

Don't expect one from me, though some things that conservatives say they support I also support.

These issues center on fiscal responsibility and smaller government. As you point out so called conservatives only talk about fiscal responsibility, but when in power they don't act this way. They also say that we should respect the Constitution but they are the first in line to take our liberties away from us, aka The Patriot Act.

The problem is that both liberals and conservatives have the same aim....

Power of over our lives....neither philosophy believes in individual freedom no matter what you have been taught.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Power - PTC Observer

We give them that power (those who refuse to exercise their responsibility by voting) It’s the re-election money that gets the attention of our leaders - and not our voice.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Mom returns

I am afraid I don't understand your post. Really....not kidding.

Please expand on your thought.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Our elected leaders - PTC Observer

are more dependent on the funds they receive for campaigning for the next election - geared to the less than 40% of the American people who vote. . . and supplied by big business, insurance companies, and special interest groups. If all Americans (or at least 60+% voted - the campaign ads would not be directed at the few who bother to vote. . .and our leaders would really work for all Americans rather than the less than 40% who show up to vote. The people who care - voted. (And they are to be commended) If the elected officials cannot provide solutions to turn this economy around - and COMMUNICATE their plan to the American people, the needs of the American people will not be heard by our leaders - but the special interest funds will continue to guide our leaders (conservative and liberal). If this is not clear to you (my explanation, not necessarily my thought, please let me know. It will be interesting to see what part of the Healthcare Reform Bill that has already been implemented the American people will want repealed without a fight.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - OK now I understand

The fact that government elections have been influenced by special interests goes back to the beginning of the country. However, it really took off during the Whig and New Republican era under the Clay/Lincoln "American System" and it has not ended until this day.

The fact is MOM, that influence peddling will never end under our current Constitution. One of the primary reasons is that the States have no representation in government since the passage of the 17th Amendment.

So, unless you agree that we should return to some of our Constitutional roots, this graft and corruption will continue.

Instead of hoping that more people will vote, you should question if those that vote are not perpetuating the very thing you are concerned about. That is supporting special interests.

Let me know if you want to know more.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTC Observer
Quote:

Instead of hoping that more people will vote, you should question if those that vote are not perpetuating the very thing you are concerned about.

Very thought provoking.

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
PTC Observer and Conservatives

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Do not equate liberals and conservatives on the defense of freedom.

It has been liberals who have pushed for more freedom in America--freedom and rights for African-Americans, women, gays, and all minorities.

Conservatives have opposed steps for freedom for all Americans and have harbored under its conservative umbrella some of the worst racists in this country.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Don't think so

Lion you might want to check the votes in the 1960 Civil Rights act.

The Democrats aka LIBERALS voted against it. The Republicans voted for it.

The Civil Rights Act of 1960 was a United States federal law that established federal inspection of local voter registration polls and introduced penalties for anyone who obstructed someone's attempt to register to vote or actually vote.
The Senate's debate over the passage of this bill actually started on February 29, 1960. However, a group of 18 Southern Democrats divided into three teams of six in order to be able to create a continuous filibuster wherein each member would only have to speak for four hours every three days. This system resulted in the longest filibuster in history, lasting over 43 hours from February 29 to March 2. On the morning of March 2nd, only a fifteen-minute break was allowed before the Senate sat for another 82 hours. By the time the 24-hour sessions were called off by majority leader Lyndon Johnson, the Senate had sat for 125 hours and 31 minutes minus a fifteen-minute break.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
More freedom means more choices... yes?

More choices made by you and fewer by the government mean more freedom NOT less freedom, correct? More choices in healthcare too, right?

.... and what about this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101103/us_nm/us_mcdonalds_toys

Is that more freedom or less freedom for the families and kids? Voted in to law by liberals in San Fran - yes?

By the way, the military is majority 'conservative', do they not fight for your freedom?

You have a closed mind. That's very unfortunate. I hope you begin to open it and grow.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
How can you people argue at a time like this!?!

Are you people not worried silly about Nancy?
Oh Em Gee!!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/03/pelosis-political-future-clou...

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
The Government can't do anything for you lion.

The Government can't give anything to you that wasn't first taken from someone else.

Furthermore, anything the government can do, private industry can do better, more efficiently and quicker.

Freedom is most often enjoyed in the absence of government in the opinion of most conservatives.

Thomas Paine effectively espouses the views of most conservatives:

“Those who want to reap the benefits of this great nation must bear the fatigue of supporting it.”

“That government is best which governs least.”

“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”

If you agree with these quotes you are more conservative than you think you are.

As for that wide brush or racism.... it's old, tired, and bullsh*&%$

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Good ole Thomas Paine

Good ole Thomas Paine also tirelessly advocated for a steep progressive income tax and a punitive estate tax. See Paine's The Necessity of Taxation.

He correctly saw the dangers in the rise of the idle privileged class, i.e. the George W. Bushs / Jeb Bushs of the world.

Interesting guy.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
You left out a few, CPB

The entire Kennedy clan and Al Gore immediately jump to mind.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
Political Families?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_political_families

The Kennedys of Massachusetts;
the Long family is identified with Louisiana,
the Lees with Virginia,
the Roosevelts with New York,
the Daleys with Illinois and more specifically Chicago,
the Muhlenbergs with Pennsylvania,
the Tafts with Ohio,
the Bush family began in Ohio and Connecticut, but is now more closely identified with Texas and a member of the family was the governor of Florida.
Kennedy family member Maria Shriver's husband Arnold Schwarzenegger is now governor of California.
Two Udalls currently serve in Congress from Colorado and New Mexico.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
Hey Bacon....

Guess what? We have a progressive income tax and a punitive estate tax NOW.

You have probably already read this but here it is for you again:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/11/719042/-Thomas-Paine-and-Liberal...

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
CPB - so?

Thomas Paine was wrong about a lot of things.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
What was Thomas Paine wrong about PTC Observer?

A great deal of what I hear, see, and read that comes from Paine seems to be spot on.

One of the quotes most conservatives and liberals BOTH cite from him hoping to support their own opinion is:

“Those who want to reap the benefits of this great nation must bear the fatigue of supporting it.”

Can you see way?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Where was T. Paine wrong CPB?

He was wrong about that too. No person that derives his wealth from his own toil should give up honestly gained wealth to the government for redistribution. They should willingly give up their property for protection from the government, outside threats, and robbery by "social engineers" like you.

Paine and Hamilton had a lot in common on their beliefs on how government should interfere with our lives. Paine was the social engineer and Hamilton was the imperialist. It is no surprise to me that you refer to Paine to support your socialist views. Paine has been used by every “ism” you can think of and none of them good.

In "Agrarian Justice", his last pamphlet(1795),his opus major he reasoned how land ownership separated the majority of people from their rightful, natural inheritance, and means of independent survival. His solution was redistribution or reparations. Ignoring the fact that property is in fact the result of our individual toil and abilities, he advocated this:

….”[Government must] create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property. And also, the sum of ten pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age.”

Socialists have held up Paine as a Founder they can believe in for good reason. Paine was a socialist and would have proudly advocated “social justice”.

Just because a man can start a fire doesn’t mean he can manage it.

I am grateful to Paine for stirring the masses to revolt and continue fighting, but I cannot agree with his use of government to control our lives.

So, your quotes and references to Paine have little impact on this reader.

Paine was so well regarded by his contemporaries that only 6 people showed up for his funeral. One was his mistress the others were the grave diggers but no one knows for sure.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
Good post PTCObserver

I even agree with most of it...

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Wrong, wrong, wrong - Lion

Lion what the heck are you talking about?

Liberals go out of their way to steal our freedom by enslavement to the state. Taken to its extreme it is socialism....remember the National Socialism in Germany? Leftist gone wild!

Conservatives and Liberals are cut from the same cloth, just different extremes.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Those wacky socialists

There this little feller down Venezuela way that claims that golfing is too elite for his country so he's going to redistribute those golf courses and give them to the people. That's after he has already determine that the state can better control it's steel industry. What a dufus; oh I'm sorry, I meant what a sorry arse socialist.

BTW, I'm trying get rid of my Halloween avatar. I hope it goes away soon.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Cyclist - so true

we are only a step away....a small step away.

Our tattered Constitution is a rag blowing in the wind, its truth hidden by hubris and complacency.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
PTC Observer

It's uncomfortably close.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
R.I.P. Ted Sorensen

— "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

— "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich."

— "Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate."

1) I think we would do well to choose our battles & only fight the ones we can win.

2) Spoken by a man who was wealthy. In Washington state there is a vote to levy an income tax on the wealthy. Who supports such a proposition..Bill Gates, Sr & Jr. I guess them and Sorros & all those other wealthy Dems have better tax advisors than the Repugs. I guess all the Teabaggers have more to protect in their little worlds.

3) Whatya say? Do we talk to N Korea, Iran, Cuba & (gulph) THE Taliban?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
R.I.P. Ted Sorensen II

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.

Some nanny state liberals seem to have lost the meaning of this.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
Of Bladder & Crisis crisises

I guess we know 1 future (D) Senator that would have voted No.
"Even at the time, it was possible to make judgments that this would not work out well," the Illinois senator told reporters.
I guess you agree w/ the rest of all parties taking advantage of events. LBJ used the "incident" in the Gulf of Tonkin to further his agenda.
“Rule One: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.” This is exactly how Duby Bush & the neo-cons got the US to invade Iraq & get US into the longest of wars.

It was his and the Neo-Cons intend from day 1 to pick a fight w/ Irag.
1) Daddy Bush's honor was besmerched for not going to Baghdad.
2) SadMan tries to kill Daddy Bush in Kuwait
It was personal. Bush Lied/So Many Died. No WMD's. No-Fly/Sanctions Working
Guess you could say God made him do it or the ghost of Lee Atwater.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
bbbbbbbbb bush did it all
bladderq wrote:

This is exactly how Duby Bush & the neo-cons got the US to invade Iraq & get US into the longest of wars.

It was his and the Neo-Cons intend from day 1 to pick a fight w/ Irag.
1) Daddy Bush's honor was besmerched for not going to Baghdad.
2) SadMan tries to kill Daddy Bush in Kuwait
It was personal. Bush Lied/So Many Died. No WMD's. No-Fly/Sanctions Working
Guess you could say God made him do it or the ghost of Lee Atwater.

I guess no Democrats ever voted for that war?

Clinton never said Saddam has wmds? Give it a rest you sound like a old broken record. All noise and nothing else.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
Bush & Ranger Ballfield

Why did Duby Bush use gov-ment (bond) money to build a free enterprize endeavor? I mean really, if it was a viable enterprize, his wealthy friends & Ranger stockholders should have stepped up. How do we spell free market-- hypoCRYcy? Good to see him enjoying the games. He looks much better in reTYREment.

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
check your password bladder

Looks like bonkers hijacked your password and is posting nonsensical thing under your identity.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
You know Obama is President right?

How long are you guys gonna beat that horse?

This economy is Obama's economy. This mess is the democrats making. FY 08 thru today has the dem signature on it the highest rise in deficit spending has been since they took control in 08. Deficits were going down from 03-07 fiscal years. Under the democrats and now Obama it has exploded.

Many Democrats are about to be retired as is some rinos. 2012 is next.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
and now

Let's see what John B and the Republican House can do.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
The new Tea/Republicans don't have to do anything... but

The new Tea/Republicans don't have to do anything... but if they are smart they will do plenty.

Draft bills that dismantle Obamacare (etc.).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101103/pl_nm/us_usa_elections

Vote on the new bills and send it to the Senate where each Senator has to vote (on the record) to support or abandon the portion of the bill being unfunded/ dismantled etc. (on the heels of what happened last night and facing the electorate in two years)

Either the bill dies in the Senate (Dems fault) or it goes to Obama where he either vetoes or signs (yea, right) the bill that dismantles his legacy.

Then in two years, Obama faces the country to answer for the economy, the war(s), cap and trade, etc., etc.

Oh, and so do a whole bunch of democratic senators.

Looks good for the Teapublicans if they just push conservative legislation that will de-fund the great society part deux. The best thing to happen to the Teapublicans was to NOT win the Senate.

Ain't politics neat Mrs.Mom?

TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005
DM

Do they get 2 years for their try? Or 4 years by the congressional clock?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Tin Can

They have 18 months to get us jobs, a balanced budget, end two wars, guide the Palestinians and Israelites to a peace settlement; deport all illegals; find workers for the 'onion' fields and have everyone in Congress cooperating. They also have 18 months to convince parents that their college age students should not remain on the parents healthcare program; they (the parents) can go back to having insurance companies drop them or deny them coverage for pre-existing conditions. Can they do it? Hell yes!! (However, if they don't, the election in 2012 won't be pretty) [And Obama will be elected for a second term] We'll see.

John B promised progress with Pledge to America. They are ready to implement their solutions to our problems. With cooperation, maybe they can get it done. Have any of your seen the pledge and its' budget?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
CHR

We'll see. :-)

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
Dems Vote for War

Much to my sorrow, they did vote Yes. Of course we all know they were lied to and we all know they were cajoled w/ cries of patriotizm to get behind their Commander-in-Chief, no matter how inept he was. Good to see him at the ball games enjoying the stadium he got built w/ public funds. If we all rise to our level of incompetence; his would be Commish of MLB. So you agree the Iraq War was a mistake & mismanaged?

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
So Much on Conservatizum

I could write alot but I question why is a god & faith mention as being so tied to the philosophy? Liberals don't have faith? I agree w/ one example:
"Social planners, however, believe in their ability to solve society’s problems. This is a typical human conceit. Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s recently-departed chief of staff, perfectly captured this mindset when he said, “Rule One: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.” This is exactly how Duby Bush & the neo-cons got the US to invade Iraq & get US into the longest of wars.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
God and Faith

Progressive's push for larger government show their belief that rights come from man (government). Small government conservative's believe our rights come from God. Does this sound familiar: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"? I think the following quote from above sums it up beautifully: "Finally, conservatism believes that faith in God is essential to preserving liberty. Morality originates from superhuman instincts prompted by an Almighty Being. When the human race loses touch with this spiritual element, society suffers as men and women feel emboldened to live selfish lives without any accountability to a higher power." Praise God and may God bless america. -GP

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
GP: don't know about that

There are plenty of small gov't conservative types that either do not believe in God or don't care. As much as Ayn Rand's name is thrown around by some here, you'd think they would also realize she was a devout atheist her whole life and sure didn't buy the idea that "all rights come from God and not man." Neither do I for that matter.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
What man gives he can also take away

If you feel like placing your faith in Man to give you your rights then so be it.. Just stop whimpering when those very rights are removed.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
GP: You Agree Bush Waged a War

“Rule One: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.” This is exactly how Duby Bush & the neo-cons got the US to invade Iraq & get US into the longest of wars.

It was his and the Neo-Cons intend from day 1 to pick a fight w/ Irag.
1) Daddy Bush's honor was besmerched for not going to Baghdad.
2) SadMan tries to kill Daddy Bush in Kuwait
It was personal. Bush Lied/So Many Died. No WMD's. No-Fly/Sanctions Working
Guess you could say God made him do it or the ghost of Lee Atwater.

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
Bladderq - you are chasing a parked truck.

“Rule One: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.” This is exactly how Duby Bush & the neo-cons got the US to invade Iraq & get US into the longest of wars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yeA_kHHLow

Maybe it's how you are choosing your words.

Oh and here:

http://www.pbs.org/weta/crossroads/about/show_the_case_for_war.html

Check it out.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
bladder

You might want to check out White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He believes that any crisis will do.

"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before." Rahm Emanuel

I guess no Democrats voted for that war did they?

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
Keep facts out of this....

Blabber was ripping an object of obsession (that has been retired for two years) a 'new one'.

Can't you just leave accuracy and the facts out of this discussion so the self righteous can continue to take a sliver of information and assign and contort it to satisfy their fantasies?

"The weak never like to admit they are the weak but they will vote democrat and enjoy as many free government entitlements as they can so fast that it will make your head spin."

I bet you can't tell me who said that. (Hint: “First, many D.C. pundits will claim that voters sent Washington a message that they want the two parties to overcome their bitter divisions and work together for the betterment of the country. Second, this will not happen.”)

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
Patriot: religion in government

We had it big time in the 10th, 11th, 12th, centuries.
The whole middle-east has had it big-time for 7,000 years.
The Buddha countries have had it big-time for unknown centuries.

Man leading man under the auspices of his opinion of what religion says about laws has proved to be fallible.

Having a law against sin (whichever one you wish to consider) and yet it causes little if any abstinence from that sin, only causes wars over it.

Laws are to control human behavior against one another, not guesses as to what is a sin that needs a law.

Humans are born demanding proof of the need for worship of anything, and the things he can and can not do or he will be severely punished.
What is the need for worship of a Supreme Being, they say, and why can some get into heaven at the last minute after 100 years of sinning.

Also, they want a lot of my money for their purposes.

Religious fanatics (those who want everyone else to do as they do, or say they do) can not be satisfied with their own conscience and allow the law to protect them instead of a religious belief--it won't.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
McMillan: Property?

Could you describe what property the government takes from us?
You can't just say: taxes, because some taxes are necessary.

Who is this "big government" you speak of? Isn't it our congressmen and our congressmen only? We elected them.

The government can not interfere into my religion or lack thereof as you suggest.

All laws that allow for imminent domain and taxes and wars and welfare, come from congress! They ultimately can impeach the President if he vetoes too much of what they send him!

What you are saying sir, is I want only those laws that I like.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Mr. McMillian - Liberty

Thank you for your defense of liberty.

Unfortunately, the pigs are in charge.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
PTC Observer

I understand---the "pigs" get no liberty!

MajorMike
MajorMike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/20/2005
PTC Observer - the pigs are in charge.

"Unfortunately, the pigs are in charge." - Eloquent ... no, accurate .... yes.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Well said!

Now if all of the members of congress would fight for these values! -GP

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
Patriot

I sure would like a list of "these values" you mention.

I am aware of the 10 Commandments Moses got at the bush; and Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and their Gospels (all somewhat different).

I also know the Constitution and the Amendments, and the Preamble.

But exact values to vote upon without infringing on these I listed, I don't know!

I suppose murder covers abortion--that's one isn't it? early births must be 4th degree murder in some way.
There we go with religion again as to "values."

Are hypocrites good Christians? Like Newt, Haggard, Long, Swaggert, Hinn, Crouch, Andy Young, The Chrystal Cathedral Guy, about 2/3 of the Gospel Singers, and church members?

Do they salvage the "values" you espouse? And I assume democrats do not?

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
Patroit: Values?

What values?
Who wrote them? Moses?

Are we talking religion here, or government?

Should people always be first to nurture, or Capitalism?

Is that the luck of the draw?

JohnnyBGood
JohnnyBGood's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/14/2008
Please tell me....

That 'courthouserules' isn't to be taken seriously.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
JohnnyB - CH$

CH$ is not to be be taken at all.

As a matter of fact he posts so much that I don't read him at all.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
PTC Observer

Then how would you know? Or learn anything?

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
observer,patriot and johnny

I have read McMillian's letter twice carefully. I was looking for a list of values of which he speaks.

The only one I saw (value) was the one about worship and faith and I assume he is talking about the Christian religon's laws!

The politicians who run on "values" also never list what they are since many of them have no real values.

Other than the "values" of Christian religion, what could these values be?
Aren't those for church and the personal guidance of the person--not to get elected and force them onto others? That starts wars and hatred.

What then could those values be? When most politicians mention values they speak of the following usually (plus how they have a sister who is a Nun or an evangelist preacher):
1. No one, not just me, no one should consider an abortion for any reason. I don't. (he is a man usually)
2. I pay my tithes at church (after all deductions and expenses).
3. I raise my family (my third one) in a Christian household where I am the master (oops, sorry, I was to leave out religion in this list--I just can't help myself).
4. The rent is too dam high! I will lower it when elected.
5. I am taxed enough already (I really don't pay very much since I drive a truck, but my boss does, he says).
6. I ain't been to a hospital in months, so I don't need no national health care. I'll save for that cost just like I do for my retirement money, oncest my bills are paid up. All them unemployed should do the same.
7. We need to whomp-up more on them muslems, scare the hell outn them oncest and fer all. Like the crusades did.
8. I'll pay that there war tax if you ask me to! (after expenses)
9. I liked that bull horn Mr. Bush had at 9-11. He means business.
10. And lastly, I go by what a feller says about whut hell do oncest elected--providing he talks about values!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
CHR

LOL! You're in rare form this morning!! Tuesday will tell the story - VOTE! (Poor John B. - still thinks it's cute to include HELL NO in his speeches.) Every time Kawfi calls me a liar - someone comes along to correct him!

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
DM and Cyclist

No I slept well last night.
DM saying we would know something Tuesday as if it would be a big surprise, I don't think so!

History records for most intermediate elections that the administration in power loses some seats in the House and in the Senate. I don't know why the voters change their mind between the last election and that one two years later, unless it is due to all the miracles promised didn't happen in 24 months! It never does--it takes more than even a full term for major changes to occur.

Especially this time due to the depth of recession which started in 2006-07, and slowing somewhat in 2009.

If Bush had not made the banks solvent and Obama the autos and road companies (we piddle around WPA) in 08 and 09, we would have had a depression. The last one lasted 10 years or more.

I am for anybody who has been in Washington over one term to be defeated by a reliable candidate which ever party it be.

I fear however that a few of those defeats this time will be by fruitcakes and nuts and ill educated. Still it might be OK since their backers who are smarter may help them enough to avoid another catastrophe.
I wouldn't want to be "handled" myself.

Is it possible that either party this next go-around will put limits on terms? My answer--no! Kick out Boehner, Frank, all the senior committee Heads---no.

I look forward to the conflicts.
Health care will NOT be voided--much time will be wasted for political purposes.
Taxes will go up--not in income--but in other places. The expired tax reduction of Bush's is up for grabs, but President Obama is very likely to veto that significant change.
Could be the republican, TEAS and Libs will put that fight off until the next Presidential election!

I see no change by congress. They are tall mud fences anymore due to polarization. What would Palin, O'Donnell. etc., be FOR anyway!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Well Courthouse,

You must have had a restless night. Do you feel better now? ☺

Recent Comments