Posted on 07/31/2007 6:19:53 AM PDT by az4vlad
Bill is also wrong on the 2nd Amendment and SUV’s!
How does that count as a conservative site?
Always next year my friend............:o)
Why is No. 53 on the list? Hitchens is way left.
How about me? I am a God fearing laissez-faire economist. The only reason for government is to enforce morality (abortion, murder, adultery, homosexuality, theft, ect) and national defense. God never set up economic controls on his people. Note: do not confuse symbolic law with economic controls, economic controls are made for economic reasons, not symbolism.
Economic freedom and Godliness go hand in hand. Label it something other than conservative if you wish.
Also note, someone can be an economic libertarian and a social conservative. The two are compatible.
conservapalooza.com is for sale....
The Republican National Committee in particular and the Republican party in general are no longer conservative. Look at the candidates the GOP is running for President. They’re all liberal/leftist.
Whadda mean we’re number 8?
The 7 above us are all news media.
The Freepers are number ONE if you count the sites with a membership and an interactive forum with member participation.
“Look at the candidates the GOP is running for President. They’re all liberal/leftist.”
Ok, that’s crap. Come on. Fred Thompson...Duncan Hunter...Tom Tancredo, liberal? Even if you think Mitt Romney is lying about his positions, he’s laid out an unrepentantly conservative agenda. John McCain is reliably conservative most of the time. Even Guiliani, who’s law and order credentials have never been questioned, has pledged to govern as a conservative.
“How about me? I am a God fearing laissez-faire economist. ....
Economic freedom and Godliness go hand in hand. Label it something other than conservative if you wish.
Also note, someone can be an economic libertarian and a social conservative. The two are compatible.”
I agree!
Agreed! I’m bookmarking also.
The gun-grabbing Boston Herald is not conservative either just because they have Howie Carr and a couple of other columnists.
Half of these sites are not even conservative.
FOX News??? Puh-lease!
I saw your list posted on FreeRepublic. You did a great job with it and I really appreciate your efforts!
You also invited input to make adjustments to it and I would like for you to reconsider a judgment you made concerning how you filtered websites from the list.
You wrote that you decided to leave NealBoortz.com off of the list because he is a libertarian. I think he should be included for several reasons. You have included many other libertarian websites such as Ludwig von Mises Institute – 28,169, Free Market News – 54,314, Cato Institute – 58,391, Liberty Forum – 211,445, and Café Hayek – 265,888. Additionally, by coincidence, President Bush held his private visit in the Oval Office with Conservative Talk-Radio Hosts yesterday. Neal Boortz was right there with the likes of Bill Bennett, Mark Levin, Glen Beck, and Michael Medved.
Neal Boortz has, for several years, been alienated from a large number of main-stream libertarians by his promotion of The FairTax (as opposed to no tax), and his support for the War on Terror since 09/11 that most libertarians are against for numerous reasons.
Lastly, President Reagan said it best in this quote:
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. ... The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom, and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is." - Ronald Reagan
I believe this makes Neal Boortz a pseudo-libertarian and pushes him back under the Conservative umbrella.
higgmeister
Marietta, Georgia.
Higg,
I tell you that Libertarians have changed since then. Back during Ronnie’s day, they were generally socially conservative as well. They’re not anymore. Their idea of a social policy (fighting obscenity, vice, etc) is basically anarchy. Furthermore, a lot of the core of the Libertarian party now ENDORSES activities like prostitution and drug use. These aren’t Ronnie’s Libertarians.
Christopher Hitchens? Smart, drunk, pro-military, but he’s essentially as socialist as they get.
Their craftily worded phrases such as - "let peaceful people cross borders freely" - allowed a few liberals and a few conservatives to be seduced from each camp into their tent for a time. The coalition was tenuous all along and was only conscionable because Republicans had no spine to stand up to socialists.
The crux of the matter is, how do you tell the peaceful ones from the terrorists, and what do you consider freely? The liberals say no control at all because citizens of the world should not recognize arbitrary lines on a map that do not exist in reality. The conservatives say a fence with a checkpoint and a smile if you are not on a terrorist list is free enough for a visit.
The rebirth of nationalism after 9/11 allowed the liberal libertarians to win their petty schism when all of the Libertarians from the right side of the graph fled back home. They are welcome to their fraction-of-a-percent of the population. Just because the LP are now pacifists and libertines in practice, does not negate their founding libertarian tenets and Reagan's words. I am still a Goldwater libertarian objectivist Republican.
Ping of interest
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.