Some Conservatives mad at Fox News deciding to going centre-right, Tea Party furious - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zeke129;34722062]If conservatism means small government and reduced spending, and the Republicans are conservative, how come Republican voters keep voting for people who favour huge government and non-stop worthless spending[/QUOTE] Because Congress and our political institutions are corrupt

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722065]anarchists don't advocate for what is known as anarchy.[/QUOTE] I think you will find that untrue. I know quite a few anarchists. They have quite the scene here in seattle.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34722068]I never said I endorsed the Republican candidates and congressmen themselves, but most Republican voters and American Conservatives in general want a smaller government, at least fiscally[/QUOTE] but you are defending them and speaking for what they want in general? people might say they want something but there's a difference in what they do and what they want.

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722069]i didn't say anything about republicans.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=thisispain;34722017]let's please bear in mind that the [b]republicans[/b] are liberals when it comes to economics. conservatism is a different boat completely.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722069]i didn't say anything about republicans.[/QUOTE] People forget conservative and republican are two completely different things. It's just that quite a while ago, many republicans held conservative ideals.

[QUOTE=Mudbone;34722075]I think you will find that untrue. I know quite a few anarchists. They have quite the scene here in seattle.[/QUOTE] anarchism as a political philosophy tends to advocate a very small state, not a complete lack of one. [editline]15th February 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34722090][/QUOTE] as in i wasn't criticizing republicans, i was criticizing conservatives.

Funfact, Ronald Reagan wasn't conservative.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;34721955]Social conservatism is pretty terrible.[/QUOTE] I agree. There is nothing good with social conservatism. Not a single damn thing.

[QUOTE=Levithan;34722142]I agree. There is nothing good with social conservatism. Not a single damn thing.[/QUOTE] um hello? preventing the wrath of god? I'd say that's a good thing!

[QUOTE=Funcoot;34722125]Funfact, Ronald Reagan wasn't conservative.[/QUOTE] wha?

[QUOTE=Funcoot;34722125]Funfact, Ronald Reagan wasn't conservative.[/QUOTE] but..but...Reaganomics!

what the fuck do you mean Ronald Reagan wasn't a conservative? he didn't make government smaller, he gave more to the ruling-class at the cost of the lower-class (plunging the US into huge debt) and was responsible for the reintroduction of religious dogma into politics as he advocated the return of the old religious status-quo. ronald reagan was a goddamn reactionary.

I hate this idea that all conservatives are out of their minds and all liberals are these shining examples of what the perfect human-being is. The fact of the matter is that there are idiots on both sides and they'll be exploited by the opposing sides to make their side look more "correct" when in reality they're only turning the people against each other. Honestly, I know the conservative wet-dream is to pay absolutely no taxes, but if you don't want to pay taxes, than you don't belong in a society where people rely on each other instead of everyone keeping to themselves. There are a lot of idiot liberals out there as well who think the government should just forgive their student-loan debt and essentially get a free ride just because they don't want to be responsible. I think it's admirable that conservatives promote the idea of personal responsibility and I think it's admiral that liberals promote the idea of supporting each other as a society, but unfortunately, there is reality. Where things cost money, and some of that money has to go to the government to provide social programs for the people who need them. I'm so tired of people fighting over big government and small government. Why isn't anyone fighting for smarter government? Why is it that the Japanese government and most of the European governments are so efficient in taking care of their people while still sustaining somewhat of a social-capitalist society? Most would say that it has to do with the US government's corruption. But I would also say it has to do with the fact that most of the people we elect don't understand what it's like to live paycheck to paycheck and wonder whether or not they'll be able to pay the rent at the end of the month or take care of their child's cough. I just wish the United States could actually abide by the constitution, even if I personally believe it's outdated. I'm so tired of living in a country where its people are controlled by fear and they don't even realize it, simply so its government can promote more restrictive policies on our freedom. Conservatives and liberals should be working towards a common goal, instead of locking horns all of the time.

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722159]what the fuck do you mean Ronald Reagan wasn't a conservative?[/QUOTE] He spent a shit ton of money.

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722153]wha?[/QUOTE] Nearly tripled the national debt making us the largest debtor nation and increased taxes 3 times. He wasn't conservative. Republicans have started to rely on uneducated and uninformed Americans and have been alienating them for years. Today, all that people think conservative means is a low tax bracket and no welfare.

[QUOTE=Levithan;34722142]I agree. There is nothing good with social conservatism. Not a single damn thing.[/QUOTE] Sure, on paper. But try changing societal norms or morals and people get very angry and very confused. There's a reason social conservatism exists: people dislike change.

[QUOTE=Funcoot;34722177]Nearly tripled the national debt making us the largest debtor nation and increased taxes 3 times. He wasn't conservative. Republicans have started to rely on uneducated and uninformed Americans and have been alienating them for years. Today, all that people think conservative means is a low tax bracket and no welfare.[/QUOTE] that means he was a very strong conservative. he just wasn't an economic liberal.

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722191]that means he was a very strong conservative. he just wasn't an economic liberal.[/QUOTE] All he was, was a social conservative who wished to conform to tradition. [b]Budget Deficit[/b] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Budget_Deficit_1971_to_2001.png/800px-Budget_Deficit_1971_to_2001.png[/img]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34722191]that means he was a very strong conservative. he just wasn't an economic liberal.[/QUOTE] What do you mean by economic liberal? Do you mean economic liberalism as in classical liberalism or as in Keynesian type economics?

What do the numbers on that graph represent? The vertical axis, in this case...

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34722210]What do you mean economic liberal? Do you mean economic liberalism as in classical liberalism or as in Keynesian type economics?[/QUOTE] i mean economic liberal as in advocating economic liberty and opposing economic planning.

[QUOTE=archangel125;34722221]What do the numbers on that graph represent? The vertical axis, in this case...[/QUOTE] I'm sorry. The budget deficit. In short. Reagan and Bush were spending too much money than their budget even allowed.

[QUOTE=Combine_dumb;34722172]I hate this idea that all conservatives are out of their minds and all liberals are these shining examples of what the perfect human-being is.[/QUOTE] No one has ever said this ever.

I'm no Reagan fan but to be fair he pretty much saved the US from a recession, the spending isn't without reason.

[QUOTE=mac338;34722258]I'm no Reagan fan but to be fair he pretty much saved the US from a recession, the spending isn't without reason.[/QUOTE] Not really. Things returned to normal rather quickly and by the late 80s middle class income was barely improved to where it was before his presidency and the poverty rate was actually risen.

[QUOTE=mac338;34722258]I'm no Reagan fan but to be fair he pretty much saved the US from a recession, the spending isn't without reason.[/QUOTE] he didn't save the US from a recession at all and he also set up the US for the recession that would come later. wealth inequality increased, poverty increased, and the stock market under his policy crashed as well: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Monday_%281987%29[/url] he basically invented trickle-down economics.

I hate how social conservatism is usually treated like just another legitimate ideology in the political spectrum. It's oppressive and wrong.

Conservatism kicked my dog and stole my lunch money. But seriously they have the dumbest values, they are sexist in a "politically correct" way and appeal to nationalists.

I wonder what will happen with O'Reilley

[QUOTE=thisispain;34721954]self-reliance and smaller government aren't conservative ideas unless you want to call anarchists conservative.[/QUOTE] You can have anarchists on both sides of the scale.