COMMENTS:
Watching the Bush Administration, I strongly agree.
Except that the Bush Admin is not really Conservative: It is a combination of NeoCon, corrupt, opportunistic, and outright Evil.
Benjamin Disraeli?
A bit dated wouldn't you say? I doubt the liberals from 1800s england would have much in common with liberals of today.
"Not to know the events which happened before one was born, that is to remain always a boy." - Marcus Aurelius.
But I guess he's a bit "dated" too, right?
by mojo on Fri Sep 17, 04 2:57pm
[+]
more anti-bush staements. God do you really think by posting all this bullshit is really going to do anything. It makes us republicans laugh the way all you do is whine and complain
If you're using a quote about a particular political ideology you need to use one that's somewhat up to date, because their beliefs change over time. If not I could easily prove that democrats are pro-slavery, think blacks should count as three fifths of a person and actually support states rights.
Are liberals today in favor of bringing india and the suez canal under control of the british crown too?
Look at the last seven letters of his name. He was obviously a zionist and a terrorist. ;)
Herzog, why are you making this so personal? I believe she was referring more to the concept of "conservatism"; or, in this instance, illustrating one facet of conservatism. A concept is timeless, regardless of the context. Obviously, that doesn't mean that it means the exact same thing in every time period since the word was adopted - but the gist of the idea is as valid now as it has *ever been, regardless of the terminology, or the "conservatives" of today.
Instead of attacking the question, why don't you answer it? I know you're capable of it. Just state the reasons why you disagree, instead of arguing about the argument. Please?
"A bit dated wouldn't you say? I doubt the liberals from 1800s england would have much in common with liberals of today."
that's irrelevant. the balot is about conservatism, which, by definition, does not change.
Applerod's in the House!! Hope you're feeling better today.
I think HUNTER S. THOMPSON hit the nail on the head when he said:
America... just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable.
conservatism does not change? that's a farce and you know it. particular ideology continues to change to fit more modern society.
What's the next thing you are going to say? That conservatives are going to go out and grab a bunch of females and burn them as witches?
Herzog is right 100%. Its funny how the liberals clap their hands over their ears when he makes sense. Then they sing their song like he was never there.
You want to know why the world hates us? Because of the Liberal Media
what i mean is conservatism is very traditionalist
Liberal media - what a cliche. Rupert Murdoch rules the media. And he ain't no liberal.
by mojo on Sat Sep 18, 04 2:36pm
[+]
Benjamin Disraeli?
A bit dated wouldn't you say? I doubt the liberals from 1800s england would have much in common with liberals of today.
Great point. They would be outright disgusted to see who has hijacked the once honorable title of Liberal.
WELLLL, let's SEE...
Under a conservative agenda, we've done NOTHING to settle the economic crisis, we've provided future generations with an astronomical national debt, and we've provided little more than a sham of domestic security in the face of terrorism. I think that qualifies...
'Herzog, why are you making this so personal?'
I didn't *make* it personal, it came that way. If I were to come up with a quote explaining why anyone with left slanted views was the devil would that be considered a personal attack on every liberal on this site? Yeah, so how is this any different?
American_PseudoPatriot: Here's a clue ... it ain't because of any Media.
I get it, it's southamerican patriot.
Conservativism is status quo and religious lunatics.
it's the foolish misguided liberal rhetorich that believes the president can 'fix' the economy. If that were true, why the hell didn't Clinton take better care and watch over the energy suppliers in California, the Enron bookkeeping, and the WorldCom MCI accounting practices, among others? WHY I SAY!!
If you are going to ask why Bush hasn't fixed the economy, then I damn well have the right to ask such a stupid question about Clinton, because monstrous fraud, coupled with 9/11 and natural flucuations in economic patters, led to a recession when Bush came to power.
Like I must have said about 100 times on this site, any small thing the president does that might affect the economy takes 4 years (on average, based on macroeconomic models) to actual have any affect, good or bad. So, with that in mind, just who's economy are we REALLY in these days?
Understand this also, i do not BLAME clinton for the economy, and in the same frame of mind, I do not blame Bush, the president can do very little to control the socioeconomic status of an entire democratic capitalistic economy that is driven by the diverse financial decisions of it's hundreds of thousands of large companies and hundreds of millions of citizens buying/saving practices.
Its true to a certain extent but I don't thing the doctrine(if it is a doctrine) of conservatism can be swept away that easily.
by OJD on Thu Jan 13, 05 2:49pm
[+]
strongly disagree , I've noticed how the Democrats against the war won't ever offer up a solution that would have made it possible to avoid war while removing saddam's crazy butt.
|
