The demise of Republican conservatism - Page 2 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

BYU71 · 02-01-2008, 05:02 PM

The people that diminished the republican party and conservatism is the so called base of the party, the religious right. Along with them you also have the entertainers passing off for the hard core right of the party and conservatism becomes a hodge podge of ideas and agendas.

What is scary about the religious right is they get so carried away they don't think about governing the whole, they believe in hoisting their values on the whole. It isn't about persuasion, it is about power to force.

Look at all the fuss they put up about that poor girl that was brain dead. Bush was with them on that. Then you have the immigration thing and instead of trying to come up with something that could work, the entertainment ideologues (sp) went off on their campaign.

No one can be a true conservative anymore because so many different factions claim to be the true conservatives.

Believe me if you had the religious right and the entertainment conservatives around when Reagan was running things they would have abused him too for stances he took.

We had a coalition in 94. LDS and religious right (who now act like the suni's and shiite's) and fiscal conservatives all united for one thing, power. Once we got it, the factions broke off to see which faction could be the most powerful. This is what we get and what we deserve if we have to hold on to all of our principles at any cost.

I am a republican conservative, I am not a member of the conservative right, whether it is the religious right or the entertainment right. I don't think Romney is either and he shouldn't have pandered to those two groups.

Tex · 02-01-2008, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woot

So your idea of a conservative is one who attempts to get Roe vs Wade overthrown and amend the constitution to disallow gay marriage? He "did a pretty good job"? Are you batshit, man? He accomplished absolutely nothing as far as your pathetic social agenda is concerned, while racking up more national debt than all previous presidents combined.

He's done "a superb job of protecting the homeland"!? You mean other than ignoring the warnings and subsequently allowing the worst terrorist attack ever, right? Oh, you're referring to the way he invaded Iraq, who never had any ability to attack us while ignoring the actual perpetrators. Good lord you're deluded.

Is it the confiscated lighters and "random" searches that make you feel safe?

Given this and the other thread, it's obvious you're spoiling for a fight over your Bush hate, but that's really off the topic of this thread. Bush isn't on the ballot for '08, and despite what Peggy Noonan says, he didn't destroy the Republican party.

For some reason, conservatives expected a pure candidate this season and they didn't get one. They don't like McCain, but they're unenthusiastic about Romney. Rudy's too socially liberal; Thompson's not "fiery" enough. Finally, slightly panicked, they jump on the only conservative bandwagon left (see Hannity, Ingraham, Santorum), but it may be too late.

I hope they'll learn a lesson for next season.

woot · 02-01-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex

Given this and the other thread, it's obvious you're spoiling for a fight over your Bush hate, but that's really off the topic of this thread. Bush isn't on the ballot for '08, and despite what Peggy Noonan says, he didn't destroy the Republican party.

For some reason, conservatives expected a pure candidate this season and they didn't get one. They don't like McCain, but they're unenthusiastic about Romney. Rudy's too socially liberal; Thompson's not "fiery" enough. Finally, slightly panicked, they jump on the only conservative bandwagon left (see Hannity, Ingraham, Santorum), but it may be too late.

I hope they'll learn a lesson for next season.

I'm not necessarily spoiling for a fight; I'm just shocked that you would defend him so vigorously. Those who defend Bush are those who are not conservative so much as dogmatic republicans. I can respect conservatives. I can't respect those who will fight for their guy regardless of what he does. That's just mindless tribalism.

Tex · 02-01-2008, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woot

I'm not necessarily spoiling for a fight; I'm just shocked that you would defend him so vigorously. Those who defend Bush are those who are not conservative so much as dogmatic republicans. I can respect conservatives. I can't respect those who will fight for their guy regardless of what he does. That's just mindless tribalism.

Obviously, I think he's a conservative.

BYU71 · 02-01-2008, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex

Given this and the other thread, it's obvious you're spoiling for a fight over your Bush hate, but that's really off the topic of this thread. Bush isn't on the ballot for '08, and despite what Peggy Noonan says, he didn't destroy the Republican party.

For some reason, conservatives expected a pure candidate this season and they didn't get one. They don't like McCain, but they're unenthusiastic about Romney. Rudy's too socially liberal; Thompson's not "fiery" enough. Finally, slightly panicked, they jump on the only conservative bandwagon left (see Hannity, Ingraham, Santorum), but it may be too late.

I hope they'll learn a lesson for next season.

Please, could we use the term conservative. The "pure" conservative or candidate has morhped into something I can't support. Eagle forum types. Extemists on the left or right suck as leaders of the whole country.

BYU71 · 02-01-2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woot

I'm not necessarily spoiling for a fight; I'm just shocked that you would defend him so vigorously. Those who defend Bush are those who are not conservative so much as dogmatic republicans. I can respect conservatives. I can't respect those who will fight for their guy regardless of what he does. That's just mindless tribalism.

I will bite. What is it that Bush has done so bad. When you set about to do this, remember I am not big on folks that say after a football play, the coach should have run instead of passed.

woot · 02-01-2008, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BYU71

I will bite. What is it that Bush has done so bad. When you set about to do this, remember I am not big on folks that say after a football play, the coach should have run instead of passed.

I think I've made that abundantly clear in the ongoing threads. Also, your analogy only works if the coach decided what he was going to do on 4th down at the 1 yard line before the game started.

SeattleUte · 02-01-2008, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooblue

The underlying reason for the failure to back one candidate is religous bigotry. It's that simple. Romney is not as flawed as he is portrayed. Assertions to the contrary are merely rationalizations. He is the best Republican candidate ... if only he was not a Mormon.

If this is true then the priesthood ban and the LDS Church's failure to come clean about it did him in. Yes, he was a victim of bigotry, racism to be precise.

Really, you devalue responsible condemnation of bigotry. Reflect!

tooblue · 02-01-2008, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

If this is true then the priesthood ban and the LDS Church's failure to come clean about it did him in. Yes, he was a victim of bigotry, racism to be precise.

Really, you devalue responsible condemnation of bigotry. Reflect!

Your unwillingess to condem both overt and latent religious bigotry with efforts to isolate and persecute the narrowest of reasoning in support of rationalization props up the premise of my post ... Reflect!

02-01-2008, 05:02 PM	#11
BYU71 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 5,084	The people that diminished the republican party and conservatism is the so called base of the party, the religious right. Along with them you also have the entertainers passing off for the hard core right of the party and conservatism becomes a hodge podge of ideas and agendas. What is scary about the religious right is they get so carried away they don't think about governing the whole, they believe in hoisting their values on the whole. It isn't about persuasion, it is about power to force. Look at all the fuss they put up about that poor girl that was brain dead. Bush was with them on that. Then you have the immigration thing and instead of trying to come up with something that could work, the entertainment ideologues (sp) went off on their campaign. No one can be a true conservative anymore because so many different factions claim to be the true conservatives. Believe me if you had the religious right and the entertainment conservatives around when Reagan was running things they would have abused him too for stances he took. We had a coalition in 94. LDS and religious right (who now act like the suni's and shiite's) and fiscal conservatives all united for one thing, power. Once we got it, the factions broke off to see which faction could be the most powerful. This is what we get and what we deserve if we have to hold on to all of our principles at any cost. I am a republican conservative, I am not a member of the conservative right, whether it is the religious right or the entertainment right. I don't think Romney is either and he shouldn't have pandered to those two groups.