Conservatives Need to Get Real

The Intellectual Conservative ^ | 02 February 2004 | Scott Shore

[Sloth]

That is, indeed, what I'd like to see happen.

[onyx]

Come on, Henrietta. Flaunting your so-called "principles" are the last vestiges of pouting unappeasables --- the my way or the highway types.

It's the democrat or President Bush. Try thinking SCOTUS appointments and the democrats' allegiance to the UN. We cannot afford to fight terrorism on the UN's terms.

[eyespysomething]

"2008? We'll have to see."

I hate to break this to you, but the only way Bush can run in 2008 is if he loses in 2004...

I meant the Republican party...

[Jim Cane]

As is always the case with you fringe reactionaries, you can't sustain an argument on the merits without quickly descending into a huff about how principled you are and how much the other guy lacks principles.

As usual, you GOP versions of Eleanor Clift can't defend the indefensible and quickly resort to labeling principled Conservatives as "fringe".

Way to lose even more votes, loser.

[My2Cents]

Then we're agreed. We'd all win!

[onyx]

Yawn. Yall have never liked President Bush.

Your votes won't be missed, because he never had them!
You're both insignificant.

[Henrietta]

"As is always the case with you fringe reactionaries, you can't sustain an argument on the merits without quickly descending into a huff about how principled you are and how much the other guy lacks principles. How convenient. Lacking common sense and anything but silly rhetoric with which to make your case, I supposed you do need to at least pretend you have the high ground."

Oh, my...now I'm a fringe reactionary! Just because you don't think my arguments have merit (because you disagree with them) does not mean my arguments lack merit. If you can't stand the idea that others don't agree with your Broken Glass Republican stance, then maybe, for the sake of lowering your blood pressure, you really should move on to another thread.

It defies common sense to keep voting for GWB when he's not giving us what he promised, and yet you call those of us who will likely withhold our votes lacking in common sense? That's rich...

Being principled doesn't involve "silly rhetoric" (whatever that means; I'm sure you just threw that in in the middle of your silly huff about how we all think ourselves so principled). It involves having principles and sticking to them.

So get some.

[Sloth]

Tell me what those "conservative principles are." Then we might have something to discuss.

OK. Among fundamental conservative principles, I'd include:

1.) A desire for a smaller, less intrusive federal government which spends less money.

2.) Respect for the U.S. Constitution.

There are others, but that's a starting point.

[Grut]

There is NO MIDDLE GROUND in this election.

Bosh. Hard-sell hysteria.

If you tell me "You're either with me or against me", then I'm against you.

[Wolfstar]

Lady, I don't give a rat's butt what you do with your vote. But don't you ever, EVER get the idea that I don't like what President Bush is doing. I am proud to support this President. He has done more to earn my vote in three years than any two presidents I can name, and that includes the beloved Ronald Reagan.

Just so it is CRYSTAL clear where I stand, let me repeat something I wrote on another thread yesterday:

Sometimes I get so furious about this sort of slimeball tactic by the Dem/left — and the willingness by many on the right to play along and pile on — that a perverse part of my nature kicks in. At those times, I want to throw up my hands and yell:

FINE! Let's all turn the country over to another Vietnam-era hippie, anti-war leftist, globalist dolt who'll go around apologizing for America at every stop, and who'll beg the "international community" for permission to wipe his ass after he poops. What Bill Clinton did to this country apparently isn't enough. We have more work to do to prove to the Osama bin Ladens of the world that we really are a paper tiger. We need more Osama bin Laden types on video laughing at our weakness and plotting our destruction.

Sure, fine, all you Republcans, "real" conservatives and perpetual fence-sitters, go ahead! Show just how craven and callow you are. Abandon this President, who's done nothing to deserve it. Go ahead and put Jane Fonda's 60's ear soul-mate in the White House. Drive a stake through the heart of this experiment called the United States. Just don't ever expect me to agree with you, or to ever forgive you, or to ever again support any one of your causes or complaints. Take your harangues elsewhere, 'cause I ain't listening anymore.

[marron]

I'm with you. I'm as annoyed as anyone with GW's domestic policies, which have been mostly designed to steal issues from the Democrats. This mostly means enacting their policies before they do it themselves.

Of course with a 50-50 country, and a 50-50 congress, with at least half a dozen Repubs guaranteed to vote Democrat on any issue, you can only rule if you manage to get at least a handful of Democrats to cross the line your way. That is the conundrum. Our problem isn't that Bush is not conservative enough, our problem is that if he were conservative enough, he would never have been elected in the first place. Our problem is that at least half of our neighbors do not believe in the things we believe in, and fewer do as time goes on.

But Gore would not have rejected the Kyoto Treaty. Gore would not have rejected the International Criminal Court's jurisdiction over US agents. Gore would not have acted against the UN's will in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gore would not have overthrown Saddam. He would probably not have overthrown the Taliban. He would most likely have continued the previous policy of treating guerilla attacks as a criminal matter, and would probably tried to have handled it all through the Hague.

Saddam would be in his palace, Khadaffi would be building his nukes, we would still be tied to the Saudis in order to continue our failing policy of containing Saddam when even our allies no longer respected the containment.

If Kerry takes office all of those things will happen. The UN will direct our foreign policy, and our troops. Our troops will be within the jurisdiction of Belgian and Dutch and Spanish judges. The UN which has proven itself inept in Rwanda, the Congo, and the Balkans will be placed in charge of Iraq and the Baath will return to power within his first term of office.

As for the rest, the domestic issues that drive me nuts, there is nothing to be done unless and until I am able to send a Republican senator to Washington from my state, which is impossible because I am well in the minority here, ideologically speaking. So GW will have to work with the tools we send him.

[billbears]

The importance of getting 60 seats in the Senate is that it is the political equivalent of driving a stake through the heart of the Democrats.

Of course, because the goal of 'winning back the Senate' just wasn't enough. Let's say I go in and blindly vote straight Republican ticket in November. No thought, just the blind pulling down of a lever based on the alphabet. We get all Republicans nationwide to do that and you get your 60 seat majority.

And the behemoth called the national government continues to grow at an ever expansive rate in the continuing Republican saga of 'stealing the issues' (read passing an entitlement program that puts even liberals to shame) away from Democrats. We know this will happen because they have been in control of the Legislative branch as well as the Executive. And it hasn't stopped, it's increased. What's going to be your excuse then?

[DManA]

Exactly. Obviously, by their actions, they don't think they need conservative votes to get reelected. They don't need us but they want us, for the same reason they wanted John Gault.

But Rove convinced them that they could finally dump the social conservatives and religious conservatives in one fell swoop and find liberal replacement voters.

[DManA]

Exactly. Obviously, by their actions, they don't think they need conservative votes to get reelected. They don't need us but they want us, for the same reason they wanted John Gault.

But Rove convinced them that they could finally dump the social conservatives and religious conservatives in one fell swoop and find liberal replacement voters.

[Henrietta]

"Come on, Henrietta. Flaunting your so-called "principles" are the last vestiges of pouting unappeasables --- the my way or the highway types. "

I'm very appeasable!! I just want what he promised all of us when I volunteered for his campaign.

Smaller government
Immigration laws that are enforced.
A sunset of the AWB.
Lower taxes (well, we got that one, at least until the results of his spending policies come home to roost!)

[Wolfstar]

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. If Kerry were to say that about some of the people I see posting on FR lately, he'd be absolutely correct on that particular point. I call it like I see it.

[onyx]

You'll come around. The choice is too clear and too damn dangerous for an unwise, or maturbatory 3rd party vote.

[Miss Marple]

I hear a lot about principles. Here are my principles:

1. The defense of this nation must be the first priority of the president.

2. Our national security will never depend upon permission from another country.

3. The war on terror must be prosecuted on all fronts and as strongly as is possible.

4. Taxes should continue to be cut, and should not be increased.

5. The traditional values of our nation should be upheld by the presidency.

On all of these issues, President Bush is far superior to any of his challengers. Supporting him is not a caving in, but a matter of principle.

The defense of this nation cannot be given over to the democrats. Any action which enables that contingence is foolish if not malicious.

[onyx]

Masturbatory vote --- I'll learn to proof, I hope.

[Wolfstar]

What is a "principled" conservative? If you can define such, then we may have something to discuss. I have often challenged you "real" conservatives to define for me what "real" conservatism is, and not a single one of you has EVER bothered to offer a definition.