NationStates Jolt Archive

I still can't believe how many people still think that Bush is Conservative. Jeez, he is by far the least Conservative President I've ever read about or studied! Let's take a look at WHY he's not Conservative. Under his administration he has expanded Government power (TSA, Homeland Security) He never vetoed a spending bill, and he basically started a War that usually the Democrats were responsible for starting (Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.) The Conservative Ideology is that Conservative are for small government, low taxes, and cut back spending. Conservative was basically started because of the New Deal by FDR. The ONLY Conservative thing that Bush has done was the tax cuts.

BUSH IS NOT CONSERVATIVE!

BUSH IS NOT CONSERVATIVE!

But he plays one on TV.

I still can't believe how many people still think that Bush is Conservative.

the fact that the vast, overwhelming majority of people who identify as conservatives claim that he is in fact conservative too and vocally support him and his policies might have something to do with that. after all, they are essentially his only support at this point.

The Conservative Ideology is that Conservative are for small government, low taxes, and cut back spending. Conservative was basically started because of the New Deal by FDR.

no it isn't and no it wasn't

But he plays one on TV.

People on TV lie to you.

Conservatism is not right-libertarianism.

the fact that the vast, overwhelming majority of people who identify as conservatives claim that he is in fact conservative too and vocally support him and his policies might have something to do with that. after all, they are essentially his only support at this point.

Those people are called Rhinos. Liberals in Conservative clothing, which is what Bush is.


no it isn't and no it wasn't

Dude, I just spent a Semester and 2 month reasearching Conservatisim in America, trust me, I do know what I was saying and am saying.

Conservatism is not right-libertarianism.

a significant percentage of right-libertarianism isn't right-libertarianism

Those people are called Rhinos. Liberals in Conservative clothing, which is what Bush is.

You mean RINOs - Republicans In Name Only.

How is Bush a "liberal"?

Well... conservative/liberal is kinda relative.

Is GWB conservative compared to, say Rush Limbaugh? Hardly.

Is GWB conservative compared to George Soros? Definately.

You mean RINOs - Republicans In Name Only.

How is Bush a "liberal"?

read OP.

Well... conservative/liberal is kinda relative.

Is GWB conservative compared to, say Rush Limbaugh? Hardly.

Well, a more accurate comparison would be to another Conservative President, like Reagen, or Nixon. Ironically, even Rush considers him Conserative.

a significant percentage of right-libertarianism isn't right-libertarianism

A significant percentage of so-called "right-libertarians" are conservatives who don't like admitting it.

Another significant percentage are those who are quite happy to expand the personal freedoms of the elite, but are perfectly willing to support vicious statist authoritarianism directed against everyone else.

But there are some who are sincere, so I give them the benefit of the doubt.

But you get my point.

read OP.

I did. "Expanding government power" is not "liberal." Conservative governments do it all the time.

"Laissez-faire" is a propaganda point of conservatism, rarely if ever put into action.

But you get my point.

yea.

I did. "Expanding government power" is not "liberal." Conservative governments do it all the time.

"Laissez-faire" is a propaganda point of conservatism, rarely if ever put into action.

Yea, but Nixon didn't expand government powers, neither did Reagan. Hell Reagan actually cut back on Government powers.

Those people are called Rhinos. Liberals in Conservative clothing, which is what Bush is.

since essentially the same percentage of the population identifies as conservative now as did four decades ago and it has held fairly constant over that entire time, i think it unlikely (at best) that there is some sort of mass conspiracy to tarnish the 'good name' of conservativism by getting millions of people to pretend to be conservative.

as for bush being 'liberal', that's just laughable

Dude, I just spent a Semester and 2 month reasearching Conservatisim in America, trust me, I do know what I was saying and am saying.

if you did and that was what you got out of it, you need to work on your research skills

Yea, but Nixon didn't expand government powers

?!

if you did and that was what you got out of it, you need to work on your research skills

Would you like to see entire 10 pages of my Prospectus?

Yea, but Nixon didn't expand government powers,

As President, Nixon imposed wage and price controls, indexed Social Security for inflation, and created Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The number of pages added to the Federal Register each year doubled under Nixon. He eradicated the last remnants of the gold standard. Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), implemented the Philadelphia Plan, the first significant federal affirmative action program, and dramatically improved salaries for U.S. federal employees worldwide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Domestic_policies

neither did Reagan. Hell Reagan actually cut back on Government powers.

Government powers in certain areas, yes. He also presided over massive deficit spending.

I thought bush was a neo-con.

And neo-cons were basically liberals who decided that using guns to persuade people is easier than using mouth words.

I thought bush was a neo-con.

And neo-cons were basically liberals who decided that using guns to persuade people is easier than using mouth words.

Yea, that sounds about right.

I thought bush was a neo-con.

And neo-cons were basically liberals who decided that using guns to persuade people is easier than using mouth words.

A commitment to militarism in foreign policy is practically a staple of conservative ideology.

Would you like to see entire 10 pages of my Prospectus?

i'd actually like to see you even attempt to defend your claim that conservativism was created as a reaction to the new deal

And neo-cons were basically liberals

not really

I still can't believe how many people still think that Bush is Conservative. Jeez, he is by far the least Conservative President I've ever read about or studied! Let's take a look at WHY he's not Conservative. Under his administration he has expanded Government power (TSA, Homeland Security) He never vetoed a spending bill, and he basically started a War that usually the Democrats were responsible for starting (Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.) The Conservative Ideology is that Conservative are for small government, low taxes, and cut back spending. Conservative was basically started because of the New Deal by FDR. The ONLY Conservative thing that Bush has done was the tax cuts.

BUSH IS NOT CONSERVATIVE!
I don't know what is WRONG with people. You are certainly right. I stopped liking Bush when he went Liberal. The only Conservative thing he did was the wars.

A commitment to militarism in foreign policy is practically a staple of conservative ideology.

Oh I don't just mean in foreign policy.

Anyway, I think militarism in foreign policy is more a function of opportunity. Nations that have the financial and industrial wherewithal to act that way do, and those that don't, don't: nevermind who is in charge. It's all realpolitik.

Besides which, bush doesn't strike me as the kind of person who's ever sat down and actually examined his own beliefs (if he has any, well, other than Jesus is the awesomest d00d evar). So labelling him is probably a waste of time, since he probably couldn't accurately label himself if you offered him all the teenage twat in thailand.

not really

I don't pay that much attention. Didn't they start out as liberals?

Oh I don't just mean in foreign policy.

Anyway, I think militarism in foreign policy is more a function of opportunity. Nations that have the financial and industrial wherewithal to act that way do, and those that don't, don't: nevermind who is in charge. It's all realpolitik.

Not entirely. Clinton/Gore would never have attacked Iraq the way Bush has.

Besides which, bush doesn't strike me as the kind of person who's ever sat down and actually examined his own beliefs (if he has any, well, other than Jesus is the awesomest d00d evar). So labelling him is probably a waste of time, since he probably couldn't accurately label himself if you offered him all the teenage twat in thailand.

The Bush Administration, then.

I don't pay that much attention. Didn't they start out as liberals?

a good number of the originals and major writers were formerly in various little trot sects actually

I don't pay that much attention. Didn't they start out as liberals?

Some of them started out in the pro-imperialism section of the US left, yes. But if you look at the neoliberal policies they forced upon Iraq after the invasion, it's clear how much they've left behind.

I stopped liking Bush when he went Liberal.

you keep using that word. i do not think it means what you think it means.

i'd actually like to see you even attempt to defend your claim that conservativism was created as a reaction to the new deal

I would be proud to. Soon after WW II, people wanted to get back to normal, before the depression and WW II era. Even during the New Deal era, people were opposed to The New Deal as cited by Wiki.

The New Deal faced some very vocal conservative opposition. The first organized opposition in 1934 came from the American Liberty League led by Democrats such as 1924 and 1928 presidential candidates John W. Davis and Al Smith. There was also a large loose grouping of opponents of the New Deal who have come to be known as the Old Right which included politicians, intellectuals, writers, and newspaper editors of various philosophical persuasions including classical liberals, conservatives, Democrats and Republicans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#The_Origins_of_the_New_Deal

This "Classical liberals" line was picked up by William F. Buckley Jr. who called himself a Classical Liberal, and so did several other Conservative in the 1950's. During the 1950's when modern Conservatism was taking off, the Cold War was taking place, and the Conservative people saw a connection between Communism and The New Deal. They took that idea and ran with it. Goldwater ran with it, Nixon ran with it, and so did Reagan. Even Goldwater himself opposed the New Deal. Modern Conservatism was started out from "Old Rights" and "classical liberals".

so is the whole current Republican administration not conservative then mr. OP? They are all responsible for these things done under the leadership of the bush administration. Are you saying that Bush is not going along with the Republican partys wishes?

Ah yes. NSG: "Social Entropy at its Finest."

Witness now the inherent folly in labelling people and in labelling thought. For if you can pin a label on to someone, you no longer have to think of them as reasoning human beings with the ability to look at any one issue in and of itself. You are free stop thinking. You are free to assume that "every Liberal" or "every Conservative" thinks X or Y and never, but NEVER examines an issue outside of those tightly-defined parameters.

This is how it starts, folks, and it's been happening for as long as humans have been able to collate one another into little groups. It is humanity's weakness, and will prove to be its downfall.

Think.

It's patriotic.

so is the whole current Republican administration not conservative then mr. OP? They are all responsible for these things done under the leadership of the bush administration. Are you saying that Bush is not going along with the Republican partys wishes?

All I'm saying, is that given what the Conservative ideology is, Bush does not fit nor follow that Conservative ideology, so ergo, he's not Conservative.

In short, Conservative or Liberal hardly matters. He's a moron marionette with profit-motive power-hounds at the strings. Like most politicians.

Not entirely. Clinton/Gore would never have attacked Iraq the way Bush has.

Yeah. But it's only a difference of degree. Clinton/Gore were quite prepared to use the millitary. LBJ too. Or look at the various labour governments in the UK or left leaning governments in france. When it's convienient they all rely on millitary force to carry out foreign policy. I think they do it simply because they can, not because of any underlying ideology.

The Bush Administration, then.

Fair enough. You have to admit even the administration as a whole does send out a lot of mixed messages though.

a good number of the originals and major writers were formerly in various little trot sects actually

Mostly in sects that were Trotskyist. In order to see "liberal capitalism" as some sort of great thing to be defended against Stalinist tyranny (and anything that resembled it, in reality or in propaganda) they had to throw out a good deal of Trotskyist doctrine and replace it with an essentially US liberal analysis of capitalism.

Yeah. But it's only a difference of degree. Clinton/Gore were quite prepared to use the millitary. LBJ too. Or look at the various labour governments in the UK or left leaning governments in france. When it's convienient they all rely on millitary force to carry out foreign policy. I think they do it simply because they can, not because of any underlying ideology.

"When it's convenient." And the differences lie in the fact that post-Vietnam liberals don't tend to see the use of military force as pragmatic or convenient, while the conservatives do.

Fair enough. You have to admit even the administration as a whole does send out a lot of mixed messages though.

Frankly, no. They are pretty consistently Reaganite.

Some of them started out in the pro-imperialism section of the US left, yes. But if you look at the neoliberal policies they forced upon Iraq after the invasion, it's clear how much they've left behind.

Well, that's a good point.

But I think you could make the case that the way Iraq was handled in the imeadiate aftermath was more an attempted wholesale looting of the country, rather than a firm commitment to any type of free market ideology. (Which is what I assume you mean by neo-liberal).

"When it's convenient." And the differences lie in the fact that post-Vietnam liberals don't tend to see the use of military force as pragmatic or convenient, while the conservatives do.

Serbia?

Frankly, no. They are pretty consistently Reaganite.

And he was full of mixed messages too.

(Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.)

Leaving aside the fact that the Vietnam War was started by North Vietnam, let us note that it began a bit after President Truman's time under a President known as John F. Kennedy. That you made this mistake is mildly worrying. That none of your fellow leftists knew enough to correct you is just plain bad. :headbang:

Serbia?

I suppose I'll have to concede that one. But no large-scale operations equivalent to Iraq and Afghanistan.

And he was full of mixed messages too.

"Messages," I can grant, because conservative ideology is pretty incoherent as it stands.

I find it interesting that, given the entire point of Nation States, no one has mentioned this yet (or if they have, I missed it while scanning through the posts).

Anyway, there is a difference between economically conservative, politically conservative, and socially conservative. It is my understanding that people who call Bush a conservative mean it in the lattermost context, and thus they are saying that his legislation of morality (such as the attempts to outlaw abortion and ban gay marriage) is conservative, meaning "favoring traditional views and values", as opposed to liberal, meaning "favoring proposals for reform and tolerant of others' views". I, at least, see it as an adjective, not a recognized label.

Leaving aside the fact that the Vietnam War was started by North Vietnam, let us note that it began a bit after President Truman's time under a President known as John F. Kennedy. That you made this mistake is mildly worrying. That none of your fellow leftists knew enough to correct you is just plain bad. :headbang:

Actually Vietnam was started when the French tried to colonized Vietnam, the Vietnamese started fighting back, of course USA being the allies of France had to go and help, the French left and we were stuck with the Vietnam War.

In short, Conservative or Liberal hardly matters. He's a moron marionette with profit-motive power-hounds at the strings. Like most politicians.
*Nods*

i'd actually like to see you even attempt to defend your claim that conservativism was created as a reaction to the new dealI would be proud to. Soon after WW II, people wanted to get back to normal, before the depression and WW II era. Even during the New Deal era, people were opposed to The New Deal as cited by Wiki.The New Deal faced some very vocal conservative opposition. The first organized opposition in 1934 came from the American Liberty League led by Democrats such as 1924 and 1928 presidential candidates John W. Davis and Al Smith. There was also a large loose grouping of opponents of the New Deal who have come to be known as the Old Right which included politicians, intellectuals, writers, and newspaper editors of various philosophical persuasions including classical liberals, conservatives, Democrats and Republicans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#The_Origins_of_the_New_Deal

you seem to have encountered a slight snag with your thesis


This "Classical liberals" line was picked up by William F. Buckley Jr. who called himself a Classical Liberal, and so did several other Conservative in the 1950's. During the 1950's when modern Conservatism was taking off, the Cold War was taking place, and the Conservative people saw a connection between Communism and The New Deal. They took that idea and ran with it. Goldwater ran with it, Nixon ran with it, and so did Reagan. Even Goldwater himself opposed the New Deal. Modern Conservatism was started out from "Old Rights" and "classical liberals".

and what ideology, pray tell, did the old right hold?

Actually Vietnam was started when the French tried to colonized Vietnam, the Vietnamese started fighting back, of course USA being the allies of France had to go and help, the French left and we were stuck with the Vietnam War.


1884?

Mostly in sects that were Trotskyist. In order to see "liberal capitalism" as some sort of great thing to be defended against Stalinist tyranny (and anything that resembled it, in reality or in propaganda) they had to throw out a good deal of Trotskyist doctrine and replace it with an essentially US liberal analysis of capitalism.

a lot of them left the sects, rather than sticking with the sects as those left communism. a few of the groups the oldies were associated with are still around in one form or another, like the young people's socialist league

a lot of them left the sects, rather than sticking with the sects as those left communism. a few of the groups the oldies were associated with are still around in one form or another, like the young people's socialist league

The YPSL today is connected to the SPUSA, though, which was pretty much founded in opposition to the warmongering faction of the socialist movement.

The imperialist faction of the Socialist Party went off into the SDUSA.

you seem to have encountered a slight snag with your thesis




and what ideology, pray tell, did the old right hold?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Right_%28United_States%29

As you can see here, The Old Right and Modern Conservatism are indeed linked.

1884?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#From_Colonialism_to_U.S._Intervention

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Right_%28United_States%29

As you can see here, The Old Right and Modern Conservatism are indeed linked.

i'm not the one disputing that

Those people are called Rhinos. Liberals in Conservative clothing, which is what Bush is.

Dude, I just spent a Semester and 2 month reasearching Conservatisim in America, trust me, I do know what I was saying and am saying.

Congratulations on spending a few weeks learning about politics.

If you truly think Bush is any kind of liberal....I suggest you spend a few more.

Bush may not be a Conservative, in the classical sense of the word.
Thats why we call them "Neo-Cons".
Neither he, nor his father, nor Reagan were true conservatives in the classical sense of the word, but rest assured it was to that base they all appealed to.

Congratulations on spending a few weeks learning about politics.

If you truly think Bush is any kind of liberal....I suggest you spend a few more.

Bush may not be a Conservative, in the classical sense of the word.
Thats why we call them "Neo-Cons".
Neither he, nor his father, nor Reagan were true conservatives in the classical sense of the word, but rest assured it was to that base they all appealed to.

It was more than a few weeks... Bush and the rest of the Neo-Cons are RINOs.

i'm not the one disputing that

Yes you are.

It was more than a few weeks... Bush and the rest of the Neo-Cons are RINOs.

However long it was, do you believe Bush and Co, are Liberals?

Yes you are.

where? how? and for bob's sake, why?

However long it was, do you believe Bush and Co, are Liberals?

They are in the sense of fiscal and government powers, yes.

They are in the sense of fiscal and government powers, yes.


That merely means they differ from traditional Conservatives on two lone issues.

Can you name any more similarities?

Any traditional Consservative can have slightly varying opinons concerning classic issues such as ensuring small government, and fiscal responsibility, and yet..still be conservative.

I assure you that few Liberals want to see the separation of Church and State smudged, and yet Bush trounces all over it.
Few Liberals would enjoy the over turning of Roe V Wade, and yet...Bush would enjoy nothing better.

So, tell me...how is he a Liberal?

They are in the sense of fiscal and government powers, yes.

no, they aren't. not in any sense whatsoever.

Those people are called Rhinos. Liberals in Conservative clothing, which is what Bush is.




Dude, I just spent a Semester and 2 month reasearching Conservatisim in America, trust me, I do know what I was saying and am saying.

Actually the spilt off occured in the late 18?? before then the Republicans and Democrates were the same party.


Bush is not Conservative...
He's a closet Facist.

(Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.)
It was started by Eisenhower and the Communophobes.

Yea, but Nixon didn't expand government powers, neither did Reagan. Hell Reagan actually cut back on Government powers.
They both expanded government power.

I still can't believe how many people still think that Bush is Conservative. Jeez, he is by far the least Conservative President I've ever read about or studied! Let's take a look at WHY he's not Conservative. Under his administration he has expanded Government power (TSA, Homeland Security) He never vetoed a spending bill, and he basically started a War that usually the Democrats were responsible for starting (Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.) The Conservative Ideology is that Conservative are for small government, low taxes, and cut back spending. Conservative was basically started because of the New Deal by FDR. The ONLY Conservative thing that Bush has done was the tax cuts.

BUSH IS NOT CONSERVATIVE!
Well, you don't quite come out and call him a liberal, so I guess that's something. :rolleyes:

I've discovered over the last ten years that when conservative commentators start claiming that someone they once called one of their own is no longer conservative, what they really mean is "he's not popular, and we don't want him dragging us down."

And I also notice how you conveniently leave social issues out of your "discussion" entirely. No talk about gay rights, or womens rights, or civil rights. Wonder why that is? Perhaps because it would destroy what passes for a thesis in your post? Hmmm?

Bush is NOT liberal. Just because someone isn't conservative doesn't mean they are liberal. The world is more complex than that...something Bush supporters and those conservatives that used to support Bush don't seem to get.

But that's how modern punditry works. IF you don't like something, just label it under the name of "the other team."

the fact that the vast, overwhelming majority of people who identify as conservatives claim that he is in fact conservative too and vocally support him and his policies might have something to do with that. after all, they are essentially his only support at this point.



no it isn't and no it wasn't


He meant that there was no such thing as, say, Edmund Burke.
And that Sir Winston Churchill spent his premiership fighting FDR, and not the 3rd Reich.

I still can't believe how many people still think that Bush is Conservative. Jeez, he is by far the least Conservative President I've ever read about or studied! Let's take a look at WHY he's not Conservative. Under his administration he has expanded Government power (TSA, Homeland Security) He never vetoed a spending bill, and he basically started a War that usually the Democrats were responsible for starting (Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.) The Conservative Ideology is that Conservative are for small government, low taxes, and cut back spending. Conservative was basically started because of the New Deal by FDR. The ONLY Conservative thing that Bush has done was the tax cuts.

BUSH IS NOT CONSERVATIVE!
American "conservatives" haven't been conservative for a long time. Bush is perfectly suited to be the front man for their modern movement.

Hes not conservative in economic terms, but he is in social terms.

I'd have a beer with him..and I cant think of many " conservatives ' I can say that about .

I prefer moderates and believe it or not .....liberals ..when I want to party .

" Party " and " conservative " ?


I dont think so .


BUt by liberals I do not mean the insane left wingers I find here ...although they seem to be good for a laugh.....and as long as they didnt talk politics I more than likely would not choke them ...But I do admit I actually come here to marvel at some of the more extreme left wingers..to broaden my base of information and to be amused . Sometimes at the same time .

Why be limited to what Americans think of the world ? Its nice to have a place like this ..get some different perspective on things .

Hes not conservative in economic terms, but he is in social terms.

his economics is perfectly in keeping with the traditional range of conservativism.

"Laissez-faire" is a propaganda point of conservatism, rarely if ever put into action.

It is however the conservative ideology, as demonstrated best by Magret Thatcher, with her privitising of all the state businesses. And if you read all the classic diologues on conservatism, you will see it is part of the conservative mandate. Rule from above comes when the people cannot rule themselves, but it is retracted and intended to make it so it is possible for them to rule themselves

I still can't believe how many people still think that Bush is Conservative. Jeez, he is by far the least Conservative President I've ever read about or studied! Let's take a look at WHY he's not Conservative. Under his administration he has expanded Government power (TSA, Homeland Security) He never vetoed a spending bill, and he basically started a War that usually the Democrats were responsible for starting (Vietnam War was started by Harry S Truman.)

I think you're thinking of Korea. You know, the successful one that helped stop the spread of terrorism. The seeds of the Vietnam war were planted by the Republican Eisenhower who sent American support to prop up the corrupt nationalist government and give it a sense that it could be as corrupt as it wanted because the Americans would keep them in power. You know, what Reagan did all over Latin America.

Kennedy, didn't want to escalate US involvement in foreign wars. That's why it's usually a bad idea to murder good presidents. You end up with unelected loonies like LBJ. But remember, Nixon didn't want to pull out of Vietnam either.

The Conservative Ideology is that Conservative are for small government, low taxes, and cut back spending. Conservative was basically started because of the New Deal by FDR. The ONLY Conservative thing that Bush has done was the tax cuts.

BUSH IS NOT CONSERVATIVE!

Sorry, not even the tax cuts were conservative. To be Conservative you have to cut taxes and cut spending. These tax cuts were to encourage greater spending.

Sadly, you're married to an antiquted idea of what conservatism is.

Today conservatism means something completly different than what you think it does.

Conservative values:
What rich people want, rich people get.
What poor people want is to be manipulated to give rich people what they want.
Support the military by allowing them to do their jobs.
The military's job is to kill people we don't like, or who have stuff we want.
The government has no right to tell you how to run your multinational corporation.
The government has every right to tell you how to run your marriage, medicine cabinet, video game library, and internet access.
States rights are good for permiting the oppression of minorities (down with the civil rights act)
States rights are bad for ensuring people's rights (taking medical lawsuits from state courts to federal courts who tend to side with corporations more, Republican opposition to the voting rights act etc)
Freedom of speech means that corporations should be allowed to contribute unlimited amounts of money to the campaigns of their favorite politicians.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you get to protest the War in Iraq, or George W. Bush anywhere he's going to be.
Science is just one more political debate. George W. Bush's or Pat Robertson's opinions mean just as much as Steven Hawking's or Darwin's.

Baisicly, conservatism today means "evil."

Duh.....The left should be happy..He is pandering to them....

US Conservatism as my education will tell me is made up of several parts.

Noting Conservatives may adhere to all or some of these:

*Support for big business - BUSH
*Support for the moral-right in America - BUSH (supposing Liberals are the opposite)
*(NeoCon)Support for foreign intervention - BUSH
*(Con trait)Anti UN - BUSH
*Centralized Government - NO BUSH
*Old Conservatism (Anti-Change) - BUSH, to a large extent
*Tax-Cuts, severe refunds and the like - BUSH
*War on Terror - BUSH
*War on Drugs - BUSH
*Global what now? - BUSH (Global warming is a '?' to many US Conservatists)
*No change in voting laws - BUSH, although both Reps/Dems are pretty happy with current situation
*Damn gays! - Now this is hard. I'll say No BUSH
*Opposition to Immigration - BUSH

Ok. So wack together all those key issues. Bush seems pretty Conservative to me. His mild tiny support for the gay community may drift him towards the Liberals along with his mild broad Government. However his recent veto on stem cell research, opposition to immigration, war on drugs, no belief or understanding of global warming, general big business support and atlantacist pro foreign intervention makes him:

An American Conservative. The only people who will disagree are those who are further 'right' (whatever that may mean*) than Bush.

*I'm aware 'right' doesnt work as a phrase.

Sadly, you're married to an antiquted idea of what conservatism is.

Today conservatism means something completly different than what you think it does.

Conservative values:
What rich people want, rich people get.
What poor people want is to be manipulated to give rich people what they want.
Support the military by allowing them to do their jobs.
The military's job is to kill people we don't like, or who have stuff we want.
The government has no right to tell you how to run your multinational corporation.
The government has every right to tell you how to run your marriage, medicine cabinet, video game library, and internet access.
States rights are good for permiting the oppression of minorities (down with the civil rights act)
States rights are bad for ensuring people's rights (taking medical lawsuits from state courts to federal courts who tend to side with corporations more, Republican opposition to the voting rights act etc)
Freedom of speech means that corporations should be allowed to contribute unlimited amounts of money to the campaigns of their favorite politicians.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that you get to protest the War in Iraq, or George W. Bush anywhere he's going to be.
Science is just one more political debate. George W. Bush's or Pat Robertson's opinions mean just as much as Steven Hawking's or Darwin's.

Baisicly, conservatism today means "evil."

Yes, Conservatism is evil, because they won't let us smoke weed, create Socialism, etc. etc. :rolleyes:. Can't we have one thread where we don't call Conservatism or Liberalism evil? I mean comon.

As for the Vietnam War, I can prove it was started by Truman.

Timeline of Vietnam.

http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/vietnam/timeline.htm

and Harry S. Truman involvement in Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#Harry_S_Truman_and_Vietnam_.281945-1953.29

I agree bush is not a consrivitive and hes not a Liberal hes a idot. He is increacing the size of our goverment fighting a war. That alone would make him a Liberal but he has somthing that puts him in the idot catigory. Hes lowereing taxes while he is doing all that.

Heres the short
Liberals increace Taxs and increace spending = bigger goverment
consrivitive Lower taxes decreace spending = Smaller goverment

Bush/Idot Lower taxes incerace spending = huge debt.

Conservative values:
What rich people want, rich people get.

more generally, conservativism is a generalized defense of the elite and elite-rule. this nicely explains why they complain so loudly about the welfare state and regulation and 'big government', but seem to have little to no concern for their precious free market in any thoroughgoing sense.

He is increacing the size of our goverment fighting a war. That alone would make him a Liberal

no, it wouldn't

Heres the short
Liberals increace Taxs and increace spending = bigger goverment
consrivitive Lower taxes decreace spending = Smaller goverment

that is just about the least acurate way of depicting anything

Would you like to see entire 10 pages of my Prospectus?

Oh wow, a WHOLE ten pages?

That's....cute.

and Harry S. Truman involvement in Vietnam.



Don't call him Harry S. Truman

*Damn gays! - Now this is hard. I'll say No BUSH

His mild tiny support for the gay community may drift him towards the Liberals along with his mild broad Government.

The man proposed a constitutional amendment to OUTLAW gay marriage on a national level.

That is fundamentally against the gay rights movement, and shows he does not support it in the slightest.

Yes, Conservatism is evil, because they won't let us smoke weed, create Socialism, etc. etc. :rolleyes:. Can't we have one thread where we don't call Conservatism or Liberalism evil? I mean comon.

As for the Vietnam War, I can prove it was started by Truman.

Timeline of Vietnam.

http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/vietnam/timeline.htm

and Harry S. Truman involvement in Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War#Harry_S_Truman_and_Vietnam_.281945-1953.29

Two crucial points of interest. First, when you are looking for "proof" of your argumentation, don't look up an article on Wikipedia to confirm it. Two, by your own article's admission, Truman's responsibility for "starting" Vietnam involved the sending of $160 million in assistance to the French for anti-insurgent operations and 123 men operating in a training capacity. Now usually, when I'm looking to assign culpability, I do it by evaluating counterfactuals: if, for instance, little Timmy hadn't bought the ice cream cone, would little Suzy have been hit by the Guinness truck. If no, then Timmy doesn't bear responsibility for Suzy's accident. In this case, if Truman hadn't sent 123 men and $160 million, would we still have been motivated to contain perceived communist expansion later? I don't know about you, but I'm thinking yes, which means Truman does not bear culpability. Lay the blame where it belongs, which is with goofballs who first elaborated containment theory, and then assumed that a fundamentally nationalist movement under Ho Chi Minh fit the communist (and therefore containment) paradigm.

Bush is neither conservative nor liberal. He's an asshole and if anything, he's religious.