Are Conservatives UNFIT to run governments!

[Billo_Really]

Is there anyone that can give me examples where conservatives have made decisions that were not based on emotion or did not play the "fear card"? Show me evidence that they have made decisions that were based on logical deductive reasoning and not on emotional hysterical dogma. If you can't show proof, then how can you deduce, that they are qualified to run a government such as ours.

 

[ShamMol]

Ok, honestly, I don't agree. This congress has done some good things, but the bad things that they have done don't make them unfit to be in Congress, just bad people in general.

 

[Billo_Really]

I agree with what you say. I guess the title of the thread is more rhetorical in nature. The point of the thread is to draw attention to the fact that many of the conservatives (and I really hate speaking in terms like that) seem to come from a place of emotion. And I don't want my elected leaders making any decisions based on emotion. That scares me.

As an example, this whole thing about allowing gays to marry and the Ten Commandments displayed on public property are non-issues to me. I could care less who gays marry. Its really nobody's business except the two people that are getting married. As far as the latter issue, I have no problem with that either, as long as they don't take the time on my dime to discuss the issue. My tax dollars should go to the real issues that affect this country without these distractions. Seperation of church and state. No inbetween.

I've never met a conservative yet who knows who Emmanual Kant is, and what he has in common with the republican party (...doing for the sake of duty...) and where they differ (reason and logic).

If someone can give me examples, I will admit I was wrong. I don't have a problem with that. In fact, I think everything I know, is a result of a mistake I made in the past.

 

[Connecticutter]

I'm a conservative, and I've known who Emmanual Kant is since high school. But let's go back to your original question.

You more or less asked to give an example of when conservatives have made a decision based on reason. Are you able to turn that around and name a time liberals have made a decision based on reason? Liberals don't just use the "fear card" - I've seen them use the race card, the class card, the you're-a-moron card - they've got quite a deck. Not that I haven't seen conservative politicians do the same thing - but I think you're critisism applies to everyone.

I think conservative/free-market economic theory is based on reason.
In foriegn policy, many of our policies are defended using historical examples, and knowledge about the societies and ideologies that exist throughout the world - that's not emotion.

 

[Billo_Really]

Liberals are not without sin. They have a few skeletons in their closet as well. I don't consider myself a member of either. They both have values that I embrace. But recently, all the conservatives I seem to talk to, immediately go off, and start ranting and raving and talking at me as instead of to me. And we never seem to get around to discussing what I proposed.

But I'm a little surprized by you. You have got to be the first one I have met that has started right out of the blocks with reason and logic and went straight to what I said, showed the opposite, and ended with a challenge back that wasn't an attack on someone's charactor.

I guess I need to meet more conservatives to forget about these other ones that are just out there. And the left has them as well.

One last thing, isn't Kant a tough read. I mean you got to want it, just to get though it. He's not easiest author to understand.

 

[FiremanRyan]

i dont even know how to respond to such a blanket statement. i could say the same thing about liberals and have it be just as true as what you're saying.

when it comes to economics, foreign policy, and security issues, id say conservatives use a lot more reason and logic than liberals do. and why does everyone think that using caution means playing the "fear card". when the terror levels are raised, libs say that theyre using scare tactics. that is so off point. has anyone heard the phrase "better safe than sorry?". thats logical thinking. assuming that everyone is good by nature and we arent in danger is playing off emotion.

 

[ShamMol]

^I think he might also have been referring to the constant references of 9-11 and how if we don't take care of it, etc, it could become a 9-11 or a mushroom cloud or something ghastly.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with such a blanket statement. They have done some good things for this Congress session, and some very bad things, but that is true whether it was Dems or Repubs.

 

[Alex]

I think the problem here is that the media will only show and report things that would be considered over the top. They never report much of the rational behavior that goes with our government. I believe that there are conservatives and liberals that get overly emotional on some issues, but I think most do not. It is just a matter of not being exposed to the rational side as much.

 

[ShamMol]

Exactly, you never heard about all the bills that both a Dem and Repub propose because it is middle of the road because that doesn't sell news.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Exactly, you never heard about all the bills that both a Dem and Repub propose because it is middle of the road because that doesn't sell news.

Bingo! :applaud
The sad fact about the media is that you are more correct in that statement than you'll ever know. Fireman saves lives doesn't make for market share, but if you say fireman busted on multiple felony charges...., same with politicians, lawyers, doctors, and all other sitations.

 

[Billo_Really]

when the terror levels are raised,

I still don't know what it means "Terror Alert Elevated"! If it is "Orange", what do I do. If it is "red", what do I do different.

It is not that far of a stretch to think that this "fear factor" is getting a little ridiculous! Conservatives that demonstrate reason and common sense in there decisions, obviously, are fit to govern. The UNFIT are more along the lines of a Pat Buchannon.

 

[FiremanRyan]

Howard Dean...enough said.

 

[Billo_Really]

I think the problem here is that the media will only show and report things that would be considered over the top. They never report much of the rational behavior that goes with our government.

This is a good point. If you get all your information from the "box", then one is inclined to think there is a murderer on every street corner and an attack is imminent. So we have to allocate more money for our defense of our country...you know the rap!

We keep gettin bombarded by "alerts", Bushisms and sky is falling rhetoric, that, sooner or later, has its own momentum. You never her about people like Bo Lozoff. A person who runs an organization called "The Human Kindness Foundation" and spends a lot of his time going to prisons teaching spiritualism. Probably some things conservatives and liberals need from time to time. But you never see the average, daily acts of kindness from citizens, or acts of logic and cooperation from government. That's too boring. Now if they ran CSPAN like a Jerry Springer show, people would tune in. I have to admit, I fallen asleep watching CSPAN a couple of times.

I have visited other message boards that were strictly for conservatives. But I logged on anyway to see if I could start a dialogue with them. Not to generalize, after I posted a comment, most of the responses were from pure emotion. They were mean-spirited in nature and...you get the idea. I started thinking that if this is the majority of Republicans, and this is how they think, then I don't want ANY of these people running anything. That's why I came to this board to see if my opinion would change. And it has.

 

[Billo_Really]

At the time we invaded Iraq... just about everyone in the US was behind it. Now the liberals wanna try to make it look like Bush went against the voice of the nation the day he invaded... freakin Monday morning quarterbacks.. Now that we're in they just don't wanna put forth the hard work and sacrifice it takes to follow through, like always, they're no actual use to the country other than bitchin and complaining.

I pulled this off another thread. Because this attitude, is the best example of being UNFIT, to run a govenment.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I think you do have a point in that many conservatives campaign and win on emotional “wedge” issues. Most people that I know that voted Republican in the last election did not vote Republican because they agree with the principles of supply side economics. Instead, their reasons for voting Republican was that they thought that if the Democrats won: Gays would marry, Minorities would take their jobs, Their Guns would be taken away, abortion would stay legal, and evolution would not be taught in schools.

I am not saying that there were not people that voted Republican because they do agree with conservative economic policies and other conservative principles, but you’re only talking about say 25 out of 100 people. The other 26 people out of that 100 that gave the Republicans a majority vote strictly on emotional issues. There is a reason for that old saying: “Vote Republican, it’s easier than thinking”. Because in many respects it is, Republicans make things seem totally black and white when they aren’t. The Republican party used to be the party of “Pragmatism”. Now they are the party of wedge issues and raw ideology. Wedge issues are what get them elected, but once in office, the reason why they typically have low approval ratings is that people don’t like raw ideology and don’t like the way they govern. Clinton was a centrist and was as pragmatic as a president could be. Consequently, the Clinton years brought about the greatest years of peace and prosperity our nation has ever had. That is pragmatism in action and that’s why he had the highest approval ratings of any president since FDR.

The fact is, there is no reason in Supply Side Economics, few economists subscribe to it and there are no Universities with Supply Side Economics departments.

There is no reason to Bush’s environmental policy of favoring industry interests over science.

There is no reason to having a government that promotes and endorses religious beliefs.

There is no reason to the federal government intervening in purely personal matters.

There is no reason in the belief that tax cuts without curtailing spending are good for long term economic health.

I can go on and on. I have to say though that I am sick and tired of raw ideology trumping reason and pragmatism. I would love to see a guy like McCain or Chuck Hagel or a Moderate Democrat win the Whitehouse in 2008 because these ideologues that are running things now if given time are going to run this nation into ground.

 

[Billo_Really]

The fact is, there is no reason in Supply Side Economics, few economists subscribe to it and there are no Universities with Supply Side Economics departments.

There is no reason to Bush’s environmental policy of favoring industry interests over science.

There is no reason to having a government that promotes and endorses religious beliefs.

There is no reason to the federal government intervening in purely personal matters.

There is no reason in the belief that tax cuts without curtailing spending are good for long term economic health.

I like your post and agree. But there "might" be a reason. Not saying specifically and absolutely there is, but if your interested, check out my post in Polls regarding Corporatism. You might find the "reason" has something to do with that.

Unless, of coarse, your appeal to reason, was in reference to humanity, then yes, I agree with every word.

 

[Mixed View]

"Being gay is not a sin, but being a republican might be"-by Naghty Nurse

You liberals aren't judemental either are you?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

"Being gay is not a sin, but being a republican might be"-by Naghty Nurse

You liberals aren't judemental either are you?

Not sure, but I think that might've been humor.

 

[Billo_Really]

I've gone around the web looking at conservative chat rooms. Practically all the ones I've seen, are for "conservatives only", which by law, they have every right to enjoy. But how healthy is it, to congregate only with people of your own ilk. "It's like a guy who hangs out with buddy's that don't know any women. Then he complains, he can't get a date." Duh!

Do you want people like this making decisions that affect a nation? Is it reasonable, to elect someone who is un-reasonable. Wanting only to be with people that agree with you, will not help you grow. Call it the Michael Jackson Syndrome.

 

[Naughty Nurse]

Not sure, but I think that might've been humor.

But too subtle for poor Satansballs

 

[Mixed View]

My point proven

 

[Naughty Nurse]

My point proven

You what?

 

[Mixed View]

My point was that liberals judge sometimes too and make commets over other people's charater just because they are conservative. Got it?

 

[Naughty Nurse]

My point was that liberals judge sometimes too and make commets over other people's charater just because they are conservative. Got it?

Oh, you mean we see the truth!

 

[Billo_Really]

Liberal logic says if we had fewer guns, we would also have fewer crimes. Therefore, from this we must conclude Liberal logic also dictates the following. Fewer eating utensils would soon lead to less obesity. Fewer restaurants would also lead to less obesity, as would fewer cattle. After all cows give milk, and milk can be fattening. Cattle also give us beef, which can also make us fat.

So we can conclude, using Liberal logic, that if we had no cows, no restaurants and no utensils, obesity would be quickly eradicated.

Here's another conservative comment I pulled off a recent post. I dragged it over here, because the best way to make my point, is from the horses' mouth. What I'm trying to demonstrate is the thought process of extreme right conservatives. I don't think this form of logic has any business making decisions that affect others. Unless its their children, then its none of my business.

To be fair, I need to go back to that thread and respond more directly to their point. Not that I'm advocating inter-thread communcation. I'm still a little new to this chat room stuff.