Subscribe By Email

Worthy Causes


Categories

November 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            

« Are you SOL because of FWP? | Main | Our 3rd Great Awakening »

Thursday, November 15, 2012

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834516bb169e2017ee52a6f22970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "What passes for conservatism these days in mainstream American politics is not authentic":

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Amazed

His second and fourth points in his plan, I buy with little reservation. He nailed those. The first is drivel. There is no "environmental movement" worth claiming. Of course conservation of resources should be championed by all if only that waste is anathema to progress. And don't get me started on climate change. The only aspect of climate change that should be championed by anyone at all is how to best use our resources (money and effort) to accept and embrace climate change for the betterment of poverty, hunger and disease world wide; marshaling resources for the purposes of trying to affect that over which we have no control whatever, is stupid, not conservative or liberal.

The third point misses the point entirely. The best way for anyone, conservatives or liberals, to fight inequality is to provide opportunity, not outcome. Yes, of course there should be opportunity to have a parent, mother or father, at home to raise the kids. But practically, ain't gonna happen. Better use of family units is possible if you can get grandpa and grandma off the golf course long enough to fill in. We as a culture have to put more weight to family in general and less to narcissism as lifestyle. Still.... good debate.

Tim Chesterton

Fascinating. Like the author, I classify myself as an independent, albeit a slightly left-leaning independent (and in the context of Canadian politics too, which is somewhat different from the US scene). Have to say, though, that what this author outlines is a conservatism I could get behind.

Shifty1

I can buy his second point, but that's about it. The other three "points" are simply progressive ideas repackaged.

Climate change..I heartily agree with Amazed. To suddenly become the party of voodoo "science" is retarded. Its a non-starter.

The third point I addressed at length on his post (if it clears moderation). Short version is that both ideas have been tried before, with abysmal results. What make anyone think that wealth redistribution and making sure more people can buy a house can work if the Republicans suddenly started championing them?

As far as his point about the use of the military goes, he sounds like a Paulian. Non-intervention and "realism" are just isolationism couched in different terms. Both of these positions are based in the premise that the US is the problem in the world, and if we just stopped butting into everyone else's business, everything would be hunky-dory. Yeah..because the Koran specifically urges its adherents to wage war on nations that poke their big fat noses under the folds of other countries tents. Oh, wait..that's not what it says is it? I do agree with the thoughts on how to finance and staff a war though!

Marv

I hope nobody take this Andrew person as any sort of serious thinker regarding conservatism. That he paints a free market as a non conservative idea is ludicrous. Conservatives support and desire to preserve the free market because it has been shown to work better than everything else. Any redistribution is an evil that damages the future of the nation. In a free market, only what can be profitably produced and consumed will be. Redistribution allows for a higher level of consumption at the cost of capital. He disparages the creation of wealth, but it is the creation and preservation of wealth that stabilizes and allows for a longer view of things. Wealth is not a bad thing.

Don't listen to this man.

tim aka The Godless Heathen

I gave Mr. ’s article a gander and I’m not impressed nor agree with much if any of it. He may call himself an Independent and give his opinion on “what passes for conservatism in America today” all he wants but that doesn’t make him correct.

Mr. Bocevich claims he’s an Independent but throughout his article he repeats the same old tired talking points of the Left - “liberals…advanced the cause of racial and gender equality”, “social justice”, “distribution of wealth“, attacking capitalism and conservative intervening foreign policy, brushing aside and labeling of “so called traditional values” and the old stand by - attacking our military.

Sorry, the only thing I see is Mr. Bocevich attempting to explain the “faults” of conservatives while masquerading as a Liberal. Seen it before, done with it forever.

My retort, somewhat in order:

The Republican Party brought us Lincoln, civil rights and women suffrage (Susan B. Anthony was a Republican). All things the Democrats have shamelessly tried to hijack as their own.

While the Democrat Party supported slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, brought us the KKK and fought against the civil rights acts of 1866, 1875 and 1964.

Under the guise of women’s liberation, Liberalism brought forth abortions, promiscuous sex and a culture of depravity and indecency that is slowing destroying our culture, values and principles.

Conservative military spending collapsed the evil of communism, freeing millions from the entrapment of murderous tyranny.

While Liberals practice their repeated failed policies of pacifism and embrace the likes of Che Guevara, Castro, Hugo Chavez.

Liberalism is the enemy of our military, spreading the lies of - baby killers, “indiscriminately bombing civilians“, spitting on returning vets and other repulsive behavior.

Conservatives voluntarily gives more to charity than Liberals, to help our fellow citizens, giving a ‘hand up’, not a motivational crippling government ‘hand out’ of Liberalism.

Liberalism has brought us a nation pathetically dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability/SSI, etc. leading to absent fathers and destroying the family structure.

Liberalism has brought us business destroying private unions. Where low skill jobs are disproportionably compensated resulting in whole industries moving out of the country.

Liberalism has brought public unions and their unsustainable, budget busting pension funds, a dysfunctional education system of soft bigotry of low expectation and life destroying low achieving students.

Liberals are the enemy of the greatest economic system on the planet - conservative free markets. Which gives everyone a chance to achieve as far as they can or want. It raises people out of poverty not enslaving them under the heavy boot of big government, socialism and the rest of the trash pile of failed policies liberals desperately cling to like a drunkard to his wine.

The conservative hunter cares for the land and the animals he hunts, not the anti-hunting liberal zealot. The hunter and his various groups and organizations preserve and protect the wildlife and the environment making it possible to enjoy.

Liberalism has brought eco-terrorism and feel good bleeding heart activists who do nothing but destroy and spout nonsense. Not actually achieving anything to help preserve what they supposedly cherish.

Conservatives stand with Israel, the most religiously tolerant, highly educated and freest country for all it’s citizens, including non Jews, in the Middle East.

While Liberals stand with the Palestinians, and others, who teach the hatred of anti-Semitism, who falsely blame Israel for all their own wretched failures, who suicide bomb, fire missiles and otherwise would attempt to wipe Israel off the map.

Liberalism silences freedom of speech and hinders our constitutional right to bear arms. While thrusting on us non existent “rights” to free cell phones, air conditioning, housing, contraceptives and healthcare.

Liberalism has brought us the ACLU with their anti-religious, anti-Americanism and their frivolous, freedom destroying lawsuits.

Liberalism has brought us ‘politically correct’ speech that damages the foundation of the fee exchange of ideas and ultimately free thought. Turning schools and universities, not institutions of higher learning,but nothing more than indoctrinated zombie factories where students merely regurgitate ridiculous falsehoods and lies.

So Mr. Bocevich may think that what “passes for conservatism these days in mainstream American politics is not authentic” but he should really be looking at what Liberalism is doing do America today.

Rick

I don't know Bocevich at all other than my introduction to him via the linked post.

And I was wrong when I referenced his 3 point plan... it's actually 4.

1) Conservatives should claim the environmental movement as their own.

I don't see a problem with that unless it means embracing climate change as viable science. I can't go there. Won't go there.

2) Conservatives should lead the way in protecting the family from the hostile assault mounted by modernity.

He names illegitimacy, divorce and absent fathers as bigger threats to the family than gay marriage. I agree with him completely though that doesn't mean I give gay marriage a free pass. If Bocevich does, I part ways with him.

3) Conservatives should lead the fight against the grotesque inequality that has become such a hallmark of present-day America.

I confess to being disturbed here on his notion of flattening the distribution of wealth... but the notion of ensuring the widest possible ownership of property makes sense to me...

4) Conservatives should abhor the claims of American dominion that have become such a staple of our politics. Saving humanity is God’s business, not America’s. Sure, we need a strong military. But its purpose should be to defend the country, not to run the world.

I can no longer, in good conscience, support wars that we fight from handcuffed positions, wars where the rules of engagement favor our enemies, wars we no longer fight to win.

Our blood and treasure, our young men and women, are dying for what reason, what cause? We don't allow them to fight for victory and so I want them home. Like Bocevich, I'm all for a strong military but I'm no longer convinced that what we're doing in Afghanistan has merit. I'm not convinced that might in that region will effectively change the ideology that drives those we're confronting. And so it's in that sense, and the firm belief that God indeed saves humanity, that I agree with Bocevich.

Hope this clarifies why I linked to the man's stuff.

Tim Chesterton

What gives me hope regarding Christian participation in politics is when I hear Christians saying something like this: 'You know, I used to buy the whole Liberal (or Conservative, or Socialist, or Libertarian etc. etc.) line, but I'm not comfortable doing that any more. I've come to see that there are some aspects of my political philosophy that are in conflict with the teaching of Jesus. I'm going to have to rethink those things'.

That's the sort of thinking that has prompted me to stop calling myself a socialist - which does not mean I'm going to adopt conservatism, either! It's harder, because it means I have to examine every aspect of a party platform and vote on a case by case, person by person basis. But I think if Christians are wanting to be true to our Lord, it's something we have to do.

Zoe

Wow, tim..wow.

"The Republican Party brought us Lincoln, civil rights and women suffrage (Susan B. Anthony was a Republican). All things the Democrats have shamelessly tried to hijack as their own."

Historically revise much? Susan B Anthony was a Progressive Republican, not a 'conservative' as most Republicans are today. There was a time when Progressives were actually Republican and Democrats were the conservatives.

In the era before the American Civil War, Anthony took a prominent role in the New York anti-slavery and temperance movements. In 1836, at age 16, Susan collected two boxes of petitions opposing slavery.

"While the Democrat Party supported slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, brought us the KKK and fought against the civil rights acts of 1866, 1875 and 1964."

This began to slowly change since the New Deal, but the pivotal moment was 1964, after the Civil Rights Act was signed by a Democratic President, and during the '64 Presidential Elections when Southern Democrats threw their support behind Republican Barry Goldwater, who voted against the Civil Rights Act. That is when Southern Democrats jumped ship.

Richard Nixon also used his "Southern Strategy" to scoop up disenfranchised Segregationists in the South, many being Democrats. In the process, Blacks and Liberals in the Republican Party and elsewhere, began to shift towards the Democrats.

Southern Conservative Segregationist Democrats have voted Republican ever since.

Today's Republicans = yesterday's Segregationists.

Historically revisionist Neo Cons today will claim that Southern Segregationist Democrats were "Liberals", and how they remained Democrats until this day. There's a reason why the Southern States went from being Democrat-dominated for decades to being Republican-dominated since the 1960's. And there's a reason why Blacks historically voted Republican, and now vote Democrat. The ideology didn't change in the south, nor did it among blacks.. the only thing that changed was the party label.

"Conservative military spending collapsed the evil of communism, freeing millions from the entrapment of murderous tyranny."


As in the Iran-Contra affair of the 80's? LOL..ok.

Insofar as liberalism goes..
* Liberalism allows for change to occur
* Liberalism fights for equality, rights, and liberties
* Liberalism tries to identify and correct errors

* Liberalism is willing to take risks (although oftentimes it does so without considering consequences and goes to an extreme.)

* Liberalism is not anchored to draconian philosophies. (like slavery? and segregation by race?)

*Liberalism can act as a counter-force to rigidly entrenched class structures. Like the aforementioned Women's suffrage?

* Liberalism intends to provide access to physical necessities for every member of a society. (You know, kinda what a biblical Jesus would want you to do?)

All of you old folks need to turn off Fox news, Rush, Hannity, and Beck and read some unbiased literature. Feel free to peruse your local library or any credible online sources for truth. Instead of making up your own or listening to fear mongering polemicists that do not have anyone's interests in mind but their own.

Zoe

And insofar as Israel..don't get me started.

tim aka The Godless Heathen

Zoe,

Not very convincing. For some who accuses me of “revising history” your arguments are rather unconvincing, to say the least.

Also, I noticed you conveniently sidestepped the other points I addressed. Not hard to figure out why.

Did I claim, SBA was a Progressive or a Conservative? NO. I’ll stand by “The Republican Party brought us… (Susan B. Anthony was a Republican). Nothing you said changes that.

You can go on and on about a Democrat president signing the ‘64 Civil Rights Act and Nixon all you want. It does NOT change the FACT of what I stated -

"While the Democrat Party supported slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, brought us the KKK and fought against the civil rights acts of 1866, 1875 and 1964."

Nothing you stated proves me wrong. Nice try to deflect.

Did you actually write that “Iran-Contra affair” somehow proves "Conservative military spending collapsed the evil of communism, freeing millions from the entrapment of murderous tyranny."? Why not just write - tuberculosis? Because that has about the same thing to do with my statement as “Iran-Contra”.

That’s like saying Obama didn’t make the call to kill (yeah, real tough decision) OBL because of Benghazigate. (You do realize he left four Americans to die, right?) No laughing out loud, that’s just sad.

As far as you platitudes and drivel about what Liberalism is all about-

Liberalism in just another name for ‘Big Government’ which limits our rights and liberties. Our Founding Fathers knew that and wrote extensively about it. But please go ahead, tell me how MORE government in your life equals MORE liberty.

Yes, Conservatives are opposed to “identifying and correct errors”. We’re also opposed to education, clean water and want to kill little babies. No wait the last one would be your side.

Regarding “Liberalism intends to provide access to physical necessities for every member of a society.” That is SOCIALISM!!! America is about equal OPPORTUNITY not guaranteed EQUAL OUT COMES.

And, as a heathen, hence my moniker, I don’t subscribe to what “a biblical Jesus would want you to do”.

Wow, just wow, indeed.

Yes, go ahead about how liberals support Israel.

Zoe

tim, you are sadly angry and misinformed..

Facts are facts. You can dig a hole in the sand stick your head in there and pretend that there was not a major shift for Democrats and Republicans in 64' but the facts remain facts.

You honestly expect me to believe that you have so much faith in humanity that 'less' government is a good thing? That's like saying it's better to have 'less' cops in the inner city or any city or town for that matter. It's great for the criminals, but not so for the citizens.

Conservative military spending did not crumble communism..the ignorance and again, human nature that made those regimes a total pipe dream are what did them in - not the meddling from outside.

Why would republicans block any aide to embassies then blame the president for this after the fact? could it be because their selling point is to fight against BO, as opposed to doing anything for Americans in harms way? Not just loling but lmbo here..

Hopefully there will be more of an agreement and a unification as opposed to diversions? wouldn't that benefit the country in general?

You live in a pipe dream as well as do your brethren. Without gov the Industrial revolution onwards would have never happened.

When conservatives expect the world to be the way it was in 1846, then yes you are a diluted bunch. And when the funding for education is cut to accommodate the building of a 'creation museum' I would say that falls in place with that too. So too is protecting big businesses that pollute the ecosystem, the ones all of us share. Liberals and conservatives alike.

Most developed successful countries have a mixture of both systems, not just one or the other. Clearly you have little understanding of what socialism entails aside from what you hear on Fox news. Ronald Reagan may have possibly been more liberal and 'socialist' than BO could ever be. And in no way does that imply equal outcomes, but yes equal opportunities for all. Minorities, men women, and so forth. Get the picture?

You may not subscribe to a biblical jesus or what have you, but you clearly lack any empathy and thought for anyone else but your self. And interestingly enough as much as I hear folks use that stoic, I don't need anyone attitude are the first ones hoping someone will pull them out of a ditch when their vehicle is belly up and they are stuck. Or would you tell anyone who came near you to go the other way because their helping hand was not needed? doubtful.
Insofar as Israel goes..

Special interests support the insanity in that region (yes the insanity displayed by BOTH sides) There is more harm than good being done because of it.

Zoe

And furthermore I did not 'deflect' anything but presented you with facts..the kind of facts that neo conservatives such as yourself shy away from refuting - because you cannot.

tim aka The Godless Heathen

Curious thing about the word “fact“, saying something is ’fact’ doesn‘t actually make it so.

Example, when I stated “"While the Democrat Party supported slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, brought us the KKK and fought against the civil rights acts of 1866, 1875 and 1964." You state that I’m “revising history” because “Civil Rights Act was signed by a Democratic President.” (Putting aside the FACT that you didn’t, nor can you, unless you want to deflect, change the subject, and offer up a half truth with no context, argue against “the Democrat Party supported slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, brought us the KKK.”)

You do understand our government works, that a president can’t make up a bill and sign it and then it’s the law? You do understand how congress works, right?

Great. Now you can stop claiming as “fact” that because “Civil Rights Act was signed by a Democratic President” it doesn’t actually negate that FACT that that three-fourths of the opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill in the U.S. House came from Democrats, or that 80% of the "nay" vote in the Senate came from Democrats. See, FACT.

And stop already with the “Yeah, well the Republicans are racists now because …Blacks vote Democrat now.” It doesn’t prove anything, it certainly doesn’t prove the FACTS I stated incorrect.

You actually believe that Republicans were for the cause of freedom, for individual rights for everyone and then…now their all racists. You either have to be willfully ignorant to buy that pathetic Liberal shtick and/or extremely desperate to make your side look better considering their past egregiousness on the matter.

Since the 30’s Democrats have worked hard to get votes by singling out demographics for special treatment by the government. Perpetuating the ‘hand out’ to buy votes. Systematically cultivating people to rely on the government instead of their granted liberties and own abilities to provide for themselves. It’s the same reason why poor people vote Democrat. It’s not a difficult concept.

You clearly have no understanding of what Socialism is. Redistributing wealth, “provid(ing) access to physical necessities for every member of a society” does NOT provide opportunity. It unnaturally forces, not because of ones abilities, as the free market does (hence the ability to make wealth) by demanding that everyone is insured of an equal outcome by their needs. You said it yourself. Now either you believe in the free market or not, or go live in Europe. How’s that working out for them?

The free market has been, and is, the greatest wealth creator in history. FACT. Socialism doesn’t work. FACT. America is the land of opportunity because of the free market system. FACT. Not because we over tax some folks who have more and give it to other folks who have less. That doesn’t create opportunity but rather dependency. FACT.

This Thanksgiving a record amount of Americans will use food stamps for the holiday. FACT.

Lastly, ZOE, you don’t know me, nor anything about me. You assume many things about me, ironically stereotyping me as Liberals accuse Conservatives of. You have no idea what I do, how I contribute to charities (like all conservatives) and help my fellow man in need.

I’m glad you used the analogy of the stuck car. I’ve help more me people in that situation than I can count. (And I didn’t ask nor care what their political views were.) Matter of fact, the last time it was a young Black guy, dangerously cold out, gave him a ride home, to the city, a few blocks from where I live now, grew up and went to school.

(Ironically, that young man, a Black guy remember, told me he couldn’t stand living in the city. It seems he was from the country. He didn’t like all the violence, the “attitudes” ,in his words, of his fellow Blacks and such. I guess he’s a racist to you too.

You can’t seem to separate individuals helping their fellow man with government deciding for us who needs help. You honestly expect me to believe that you have so much faith in government that more of it is a good thing? This country was made great by a limited government. Our constitution limits the role of government in our lives. If you wish for more government you don’t want the same America that our founders wanted, that freedom brings, that liberties bestow. You want something else. You can’t have American freedom AND more government. What government gives, they can, and will, take away

Now, Zoe, tomorrow I’ll be celebrating Thanksgiving with my family and some friends. Those friends are two gay guys. Great folks, funny, smart and engaging. Their also staunch conservatives. And they don’t believe in gay marriage. Homophobes, right Zoe?

We’ll be at my sister’s house. She’s a 9/11 conservative, still believes in abortion and gay marriage. Her husband is a conservative who leans libertarian, believes in drug legalization, etc.

As for me, I was more liberal when I was younger. I reached my current political views, not by watching Fox News (which didn’t exist until a few years ago) as you accuse, but based on my own life experiences. By careful thought and analysis, not by someone having to convince me something that just isn’t so.

My point is, Zoe, don’t presume to know how I, or other conservatives, formed their opinions or what they watch or listen to. Learn to look outside of what you’ve already decided what and why we are who we are. Contemplate what you think you know, because it just might not be so.

But I don’t have much faith in anyone who could think that “Ronald Reagan may have possibly been more liberal and 'socialist' than BO could ever be” and “Today's Republicans = yesterday's Segregationists.”


Good day.

Zoe

Says the person who makes sweeping generalizations of liberals...

It's a simple concept, yesterdays DEMOCRATS were conservative and pro slavery, pro segregation, and pro KKK because they were CONSERVATIVE. Not liberal. Can you read that? I hope so.

And insofar as the baby killing that liberals do..are you reffering to Roe vs Wade? the legalization of abortion?
Pop quiz..what political party was Justice Harold Blackmun the author of Roe Vs Wade? or the president who elected him? I'll give you a hint..neither one of the was a LIBERAL nor a DEMOCRAT...

More gov does not necesarily mean a good thing, no, (and I did mention EXTREMES, as you failed to even bother to read, not surprisingly) but a good portion of government intervention is needed. The Free market as you mentioned needs GOVERNMENT to work, whether you admit this simple fact or not.

I was talking mostly about you not admitting that you (like everyone else at any time) need help at times. And when you need it I am sure you will not TURN IT AWAY. I have found that those who decry 'handouts' are the first to stand in line themselves.

And my guess is you will not.
Great, so you help a black guy and have gay friends, precisely the kind of mindless deflection of someone who votes against the rights of both groups collectively. You don't fool anyone. You certainly do not fool most of them.

Of course I know that a president does not have any say in matters of congress or special interest groups, hence the reason why we funnel BILLIONS of dollars to a foreign country that does what we would declare war on other countries for doing..in fact that is exactly what neo cons do.

I say neo con because that is preciley the way you state your arguments. You may believe in the free market but that would hardly make you a true conservative.

True conservatives are non interventionist, and are for individual rights. That includes those so called gay friends rights to marry.

I do not have to apologize for being libeal any more than JFK did, and for the same reasons. I understand that people use the system, due to lazyness, incorrigability, self loathing, and addiction and other illnesses. This does not mean I will stop trying to help others because of some bad apples. I am also a patriot, and would help any of you just the same. Even the person who says he will refuse the help of any BO voter. Sad as that is..

You have a good day with your family tomorrow Mr tim..

Zoe

Oh, yeah..

Borrowing ideas and approaches from socialists would not make Obama any more of a socialist than Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt or Dwight Eisenhower.

All these presidential predecessors sampled ideas from Marxist tracts or borrowed from Socialist Party platforms so frequently that the New York Times noted in a 1954 profile the faith of an aging Norman Thomas that he “had made a great contribution in pioneering ideas that have now won the support of both major parties”—ideas like “Social Security, public housing, public power developments, legal protection for collective bargaining and other attributes of the welfare state.”

The FACT is that many of the men who occupied the Oval Office before Obama knew that implementation of sound socialist or social democratic ideas did not put them at odds with the American experiment or the Constitution. FACT.

Again, have a great holiday...

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

BlogAds


Tip Jar


Plainly Offsetting Costs


Search Brutally Honest


  • Google

    WWW
    www.brutallyhonest.org

BlogStuff

Visitors


Creative Commons License

Plainly Quotable