permafrost Loc: Minnesota

These are pretty much the main reasons I can not become a conservative..

I'm absolutely open to conservative views!

Here's one I rather like: fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem, though: can you name the last Republican president to balance a budget? Hint: It wasn't Trump, either Bush, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon. Instead, the GOP has driven up spending, primarily on the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

Here's another one I like: keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. If you're lobbying for the federal government to tell people how to conduct their sexuality, you're in violation of this. The GOP has been bitterly cruel to the LGBT community. Also, the anti-abortion movement is not for personal freedom; it is for imposing your moral judgments on others.

In my estimation, conservatism went off the tracks in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the Religious Right. Increasingly, the conservative movement seems to be predicated on two very questionable premises: (1) Straight white Christian men are best suited to decide what's right for everyone in this country, and (2) unfettered capitalism always makes the world better.

But frankly, the biggest problem that I have with “modern” conservatism is its apparent immunity to scientific truths. If you think climate change is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. If you think evolutionary biology is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train.

eden

I can't disagree with most of your post but to be fair some liberal thinking is a little too indulgent the other way. Both major parties seem like giant omnibuses that if you board after seeing something you like you suddenly find yourself in the company of malodorous ideas that are also on the bus. Seems like the country functions slightly better under centrist candidates like Bush 41 and Clinton. What is not attractive is a Presidency that ignores and even derides the core voters of the opposite party as if "we are in charge now and you morons can eat it..."
Nixon and Trump come to mind in that category.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Eden,

Well put... I truly agree with your comments... Thank you..

JW

I was a liberal for most of my life. I was a local official in the McGovern campaign. I gave up on the Left when two things became overly commonplace in the Leftist vocabulary; everyone they didn't like became Hitleresque and it became common "knowledge" that the "people" were not smart enough to know what is best for themselves.

There is a basic truth I learned about power. To get it, the solicitors will promise everything and to keep it, the holders will do anything. Power doesn't live by the same rules as the "common people".

It really doesn't matter what you label the politicians. They behave exactly the same depending on their control of the processes.

E

These are some of the main reasons I disagree, am primarily a Conservative and couldn't be a Liberal.

Fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem. People think that Presidents balance the budget. They propose ideas, the House of Representatives balances the budget. The last time that was near done was when a Republican Congress balanced the books while Clinton was President. And they had to cook the books a bit to accomplish that. Both parties stink at that. But the Liberals are the ones who continue to tax and spend thinking your money and earning capacity is theirs to take and give to those who aren't earning enough.

Keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. Conservatives are for that. One of the reasons we dislike ACA that made overage nuns pay for birth control. Forced people into unaffordable insurance policies. I'm also against making the ABCXYZ community a special class with special privileges and rights. I'm also for everyone's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Life begins at conception. Imprisonment is for those that would deny us of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And the right to the pursuit of happiness is the right to keep the fruits of our labors unless the just needs of society require we help pay for the overall society. That doesn't include paying for the lazy layabout to collect welfare forever.

In my estimation, conservatism was correct in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the values of religious people who were the basis and foundation of what made America great. Religious people don't have the right to force their religion on you and they defend against those that would force immorality on their communities. Rightfully so. Straight white Christian men led America to our greatest days. We embrace any who would continue in that tradition. Capitalism is absolutely the best system in the world for bring a country to prosperity and competitiveness. Compare North and South Korea. Look what it did for Japan and Germany. Eastern Europe is rising dramatically as it moves further and further from it's previous Communist dictators. Look at Venezuela. Prosperous and sitting on some of the greatest oil reserves in the world. A decade of Socialism and they can't afford toilet paper or food or medial help. Yeah, Capitalism rocks.

Conservatives recognize scientific truths. We profit from it via Capitalism. Climate change IS NOT IN ANY REAL SENSE, a product on the intervention of man. You are scientifically illiterate if you think so. And until you advocate any real change that actually addresses the only possible fault of man in the equation, you are scientifically illiterate and brain washed by those that would control you. The main so called solutions are full of waste and pollution, and locked into trillions of dollars of needed structural improvements, and attack endangered species that so called Liberals pretend to protect when it is convenient and a position to attack Conservatives.

And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train. The Liberal train is headed down a track to failed policies. The Conservative Capitalist train is on a fast track to prosperity, freedom and opportunity for all.

cheers

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Fiscal responsibility and balancing the budget are not necessarily the same thing. It's all about sustainable ratios. the ratio of interest payments to GDP. Ratio of economic growth to spending, inflation etc. The budget was last balanced under the presidency of Bill Clinton. It is well known he would have never gotten there without the Gingrich congress.
You are such a joke. You don't like Republicans because they won't balance a budget yet you join the side (Democrat's) that wants to spend even more. You think Christian's should be forced by government to participate in activities that go against their religion. We don't believe making abortion illegal is about interfering in some woman's right to choose. She already made a choice if she got pregnant and didn't want to be pregnant She chose to be irresponsible. We believe we are protecting the life and liberty of the fetus. Your scientific truths are not settled science. You just have no tolerance for debate. You swallow hook line and sinker anything that goes with you personal ideology. I don't think you are capable of an original thought. The reason you cannot become a conservative is you have no common sense.

peter11937 Loc: NYS

Excellent post, thanks for your clarity.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

No POTUS has ever balanced a budget. Ever.

The last Congress to balance a budget was the 92 GOP Congress led by Newt.

The last POTUS to sign one after having it rammed down his throat is Clinton.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Thanks for the good response..

Many of the opinions I would and will argue with. But I think they are well considered and well stated..

I like that. Again thank you..

Loki Loc: Georgia

If only they had been as fiscally responsible as, say, Obama. You are obviously as knowledgeable about fiscal matters as most Liberals. The House is in charge of financial matters. The same Democrat House that was in charge of the budget while Nixon and Ford were president. The same Democrat House that was in charge of the money when Reagan was president.

Since you are such a fountainhead of scientific knowledge regarding global warming, perhaps you can enlighten the rest of us poor, benighted conservative troglodytes.....how much has the global temperature warmed in the past ten years? I believe that zero is the proper number. Of course, with Liberal math, that is warming.
Regarding evolutionary theory, which part are conservatives not supposed to believe in? You seem to know all about it.

peter11937 Loc: NYS

It may have come up a tad since 1917, the little ice age ended circa 1880, and some increase would be expected over the last 137 years, but not much.....

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Quit being so damned civil. It's distracting us.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Can not get the darn graphs to move.. But as you know, only a small increase in global temperature will have a huge impact..

Global Temperature
LATEST ANNUAL AVERAGE: 2016
0.99 °C
DOWNLOAD DATA
This graph illustrates the change in global surface temperature relative to 1951-1980 average temperatures. Sixteen of the 17 warmest years in the 136-year record all have occurred since 2001, with the exception of 1998. The year 2016 ranks as the warmest on record. (Source: NASA/GISS). This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The time series below shows the five-year average variation of global surface temperatures. Dark blue indicates areas cooler than average. Dark red indicates areas warmer than average.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

I know, it is a bitch when people do that..

PeterS

All nicely stated. When I look at todays conservative I see a people who are raised to believe that logical fallacies are truth and that ideology is more important than anything else. It's the combination of the two that allows for them to think that Russian meddling part of status quo and nothing they need worry about--something no red blooded conservative would have allowed in the past...