What is a Conservative

Interesting question

Published on November 27, 2004 By Dr Guy In Politics

Simply put what is a conservitive?.

Conservative or Republican?

Conservatives believe in limited goverment. We dont like a 'nanny state'. We want to decide for ourselves. We do believe that the UN is a joke, not due to a misconception, but due to historical perspective. They just have not done anything to indicate they believe or support their charter.

We believe in Charity for the misfortunate, but that it should be a helping hand, not a hand out. We belive that life is not fair. But people can be fair and charitable. So if you are making a million, and your neighbor is not, that is not bad. it is life. But we can and do offer a helping hand.

We believe that our earnings are ours, and our charitible contributions are also ours. To give to those we see as the needy, and not the greedy. Does that make us bad?

We are not judgemental. So you can decide the last question. And in the final analysis,. we are not going to debate you . Because your definitions of needy and greedy is your own subjective opinion, as is ours. So you can support yours, and we can support ours.

We also believe that all people are equal, but life is not equal., So while I am not billl Gates, that does not mean I was deprived. It just means I made different decisions.

We also do not condemn progress just because it is not to the liking of some tree huggers. We love the environment, but we do not subvert humanity for it.

We understand that the Sun, and the earth have more impact on global cooling than this feeble thing called man can ever have. yet we know we can pollute it and we strive to make sure we dont.

We are the socialist and Communist worst nightmare, and best hope. We care, but in the end, more than caring, we do. We dont hug trees, we harvest them, and replace them. So that there are more trees today than when our ancestors set foot on this continent. (Can the socialist of Europe say that?).

We are your worst nightmare for one simple reason. We are right. And you just care, but dont know.

I know this is going to get flames., but in the end, it will make no difference. For Lliberals care, but do nothing. Conservatives care and do. Not always the best, but always to make a change.

THAT is the difference.

Comments (Page 2)

DNCdude

on Nov 27, 2004

I could give a rat's ass what you think is invalid or not. I wasn't even talking to you. Take your 'invalid' and shove it up your ass. Sideways.

Compassionate certainly doesn't describe you now does it?

With interest to see if you have a valid point,
DNCdude

P.S. What ever on Earth do you mean by sideways?

dharmagrl

on Nov 27, 2004

Compassionate certainly doesn't describe you now does it?

Really? Perhaps you should read my blog before you make assumptions.

Unless I'm mistaken, the title of this article is 'what is a conservative'. My statement was an attempt to describe what 'conservative' means to me. I was addressing Dr Guy, the author of this article, not you.

Is that valid enough for you?

messybuu

on Nov 27, 2004

Liberals can and do definitely contribute realistically to the nation. I don't think it matters as much whether or not somebody is conservative or liberal as it does whether people are able to understand that the ends does not justify the means and the means does not justify the ends.

This is such pure bullshit I can't just let it stand. Who do you think entertains you? Who wrote the great works of philosophy that underpin your ideals? Who creates the artworks and the music that define generations? Who fought to end the poorhouses of the 19th century? Who fought for women's liberation and the end of slavery?

It's rare that you can attribute any of the above directly to conservatives, but it's quite common to be able to make the links to liberals. Liberals may not make as much money and 'product' (although that is highly debatable as well) but they do contribute just as much as conservatives to society.

Many artists are liberal, but they all aren't. And it's true that liberals have contributed to society, and they always will, but one can't justify all liberal actions by the actions of liberals in the past, because all liberal fights both past and present aren't positive (i.e. NAMBLA, which is arguably more liberal than those who oppose them).

DNCdude

on Nov 27, 2004

To dharmagrl,
I am sorry. I should have paid more attention to the topic at hand. However the remarks I made in a hidden way represent my views on what being a conservitive is. And just so you know I did read your blog. And I beseach of you too forgive my pursuance of validation. I had taken offense from your remark and wanted a vent however I believe I did so innapropriatly.

Conservatisism to me isn't quite what most here think of it I admit I have seen near only one half of it. The snarling half bitter at what ever disagrees. To some extent I would say the 9th reply is what I see of concervitism. May hap the writer of that certain reply find a way less demeaning to voice their veiw of conservatism.

Sincerly and Appologeticcally,
DNCdude

dharmagrl

on Nov 27, 2004

DNCdude...apology accepted and I would like to offer mine in return. I shouldn't have said what I did....

Conservatisism to me isn't quite what most here think of it

So, tell us what is.....

DNCdude

on Nov 27, 2004

Conservitism from a Liberal Perspective
(Please notify me if my wordchoice offends you and that the purpose of this input is to give my side of the story not to to be offensive.)
When I look at the aspects of concervitism I see three parties
-Republican/Reagan Democrat Politicians
-Republican citizens
-A mixture

As for citizens I truly believe they, though they may not admit are just as liberal as a liberal is conservitive. In that I mean many many qualities that are considered concervitive are considered liberal as well.

This for instance is true in both perspectives if only a liberal applies it in his life more liberaly and a concervitive more to a concerved degree.
Concervitism to me though is represent more through the elected leadership.
Tom Delay for example, if indicted on felon charges will still be allowed to lead the party in the house, what is wrong with that? He is not just a Texas representative he is an American representative and his actions along with any other political leader are what tells the world who we are. Although by no means should any country innfluence us on how we act except in stating facts. Do we really want our neighbors to see a country governed of criminals or of just men looking to make the case of their veiws heard? To move up to senate level what do I see there? That is where I see the worst aspects of concervitism, the snarling bitter half. I find the conservtive leaders their including Bill Frist, John McCain, and Harry Reid to be among the most unreputable in hte entire of U.S. leadership. Yes call me names and lol but I do to believe the face of the concervative party arrogant. I find that anything they see as unfit is not worthy of consideration but only of insult. That certain groups can find solice while others find a secluded lonely feeling. Though this is only the tip of teh ice berg on wrongs and rights that is all I will say.

Sincerely,
DNCdude

P.S. dharmagirl appology accepted!

DNCdude

on Nov 27, 2004

I hope that will help clarify my previous statements in this blog. I have turned this into an article if anyone wishes to argue or add support to my statements.

Sincerely,
DNCdude

Dr Guy

on Nov 27, 2004

Just curious but who are you to decide what is achievable and what is not. Personally your input is invalid dharmagrl.

How about results? Let them decide. Is not that objecctive?

drmiler

on Nov 27, 2004

Reply #13 By: DNCdude - 11/27/2004 8:09:06 PM
drmiller I did say in my original message that the ban was flawed. Wether it was a factor in the decrease in crime in the ninieties I will leave up to you. However of the facts I have I say it helped.

Sincerely,
DNCdude

P.S. Long Live Bill Clinton!

You can think that if you want, but I can show you otherwise.

The NRA wants to put illegal military style rapid-fire assault weapons, including AK-47s and Uzis, back on our streets. Tell President Bush no way is this going to happen. The Assault Weapons Ban must be renewed. In this day and age, why would anyone want to put these killing machines back on our streets?

Tell President Bush and Congress that Americans want sane gun laws.
Moore is trying to be tricky here. Notice he doesn’t say “Automatic” weapons, rather, “rapid- fire”. Why the distinction? Because the term “military-style” conjures up an image of a rifle that fires in “rock and roll” mode , ergo, pull the trigger, empty the magazine with one squeeze.
However, these type weapons have been illegal since before WWII. The “rapid -fire” weapons Moore is referring to are semi- automatic weapons, one squeeze of the trigger, one round through the barrel, albeit there is no need to re-cock the weapon, or re-charge the chamber by operating the bolt. The Assault weapons ban limits the type of legal weapons SIMPLY BY HOW THEY APPEAR ,not function. So I know this to be a silly law, but still, I’m a nosey guy, so I nosed my way over to the FBI.The FBI Stats

Considering myself a sane person , who likes sane laws, I decided to quickly look into the matter, as time is drawing near for the law to expire, and if I needed to follow Moore’s advice with a call to my Senator, I’d better do it pronto. I had one simple question. Are rifles a greater risk to Americans than other weapons? After all, Moore calls them “killing machines”. Sounds pretty serious to me.

Here’s what I found about how these rifles are affecting us today.

In 2002 ( the last full year available) 480 people were murdered with rifles while 929 people were killed with bare hands.

In 2001, 389 people were murdered with rifles while 924 people were killed with bare hands.

In 2000, 396 people were murdered with rifles while 892 people were killed with bare hands.

It might be interesting to know also, that in the years 2000,2001,2002, 7237 people were beaten to death with blunt objects, ( hammers, etc.) or stabbed or sliced to death with knives.

NEW YORKERS are at least four times as likely to be punched to death than to be killed with an assault-style rifle, unpublished state crime statistics show.

The eye-opening figures — obtained by The Post from the state Division of Criminal Justice Services — reveal that New Yorkers are also at least twice as likely to be clubbed to death than shot dead by an attacker wielding one of the semi-automatic rifles previously covered by a federal government ban that expired last week.

The most recent statewide statistics — murder-by-weapon-type figures from 2002 — also show that New Yorkers are at least five times as likely to be stabbed to death with a knife than they are to be shot with an assault rifle.

Of 893 murders committed two years ago, just 22 — or slightly over 2 percent — were carried out using some form of rifle, including assault-rifles, the figures show.

The CDC is unable to show one way or the other if the AWB had any effect.

Dr Guy

on Nov 27, 2004

This is a great post, DrGuy, but I find this statement (above) far too broad, and insulting, actually.

Yes and it is so stereotypical. I was just trying to show a point. You are right, So let us agree to do so, and not feel?

DNCdude

on Nov 27, 2004

In response to drmiler:
Note that in all years listed in your argument the ban was in affect. No proof it helped you say? I wonder what the stats were before that? True I do not know the specifics but I am 95% sure they were higher than what your giving me. And there is the issue of money to consider. To my knowledge such guns are quite expensive. I mean come on! Buy a knife at a grocer that know one knows exactly who owns or weapon you wipped out your credit card to buy shorltly before the murder. In response to your second article above it contains information purly on the state of New York and though you may live in New York not everyone does there for those statistics make up only around1/50 of the whole picture. However you are entitled to your opinion and I appreciatte your input.

Sincerely,
DNCdude

drmiler

on Nov 28, 2004

Reply #26 By: DNCdude - 11/27/2004 11:41:16 PM
In response to drmiler:
Note that in all years listed in your argument the ban was in affect. No proof it helped you say? I wonder what the stats were before that? True I do not know the specifics but I am 95% sure they were higher than what your giving me. And there is the issue of money to consider. To my knowledge such guns are quite expensive. I mean come on! Buy a knife at a grocer that know one knows exactly who owns or weapon you wipped out your credit card to buy shorltly before the murder. In response to your second article above it contains information purly on the state of New York and though you may live in New York not everyone does there for those statistics make up only around1/50 of the whole picture. However you are entitled to your opinion and I appreciatte your input.

Sincerely,
DNCdude

The CDC is unable to prove one way or the other if the AWB had any effect.

are you kidding me? NY is second only to DC in firearm related homocides. And while I'm thinking about it what good did the ban do in DC? Their homocides have *climbed* since 1994. And your not allowed to have *any* firearms in DC at all.

DNCdude

on Nov 28, 2004

None-the-less I'll give you my input anyway.

SNCLY,
DNCdude

drmiler

on Nov 28, 2004

Reply #28 By: DNCdude - 11/28/2004 12:19:35 AM
None-the-less I'll give you my input anyway.

SNCLY,
DNCdude

Your input has been noted.

drmiler

on Nov 28, 2004

Reply #28 By: DNCdude - 11/28/2004 12:19:35 AM
None-the-less I'll give you my input anyway.

SNCLY,
DNCdude

You have to admit though....if you use DC as your model then the AWB didn't do a lot of good.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!