How does that equate with the modern definition of an American Conservative, one who holds reverence for the US Constitution?
I can compare some positions, if you'd like.
- Nationalism, manifested in anti-immigration policies, opposition to international governing bodies, and hawk foreign policy.
- Capitalist socialization - the centralization of political power in the upper classes. Manifested in tax policy, voter ID legislation, election finance, deregulation, and protecting foreign interests of capital.
- Opposition to the power placed in labor. Manifested in the above, along with opposition to unions, and resistance to strikes.
- Government control of social lives - prohibition of things like drugs, marital practices, abortion, and who can live with whom.
The text that I've set in bold aren't modern American conservative policies.
That's because your logic to get there is off. For instance, immigration. No conservative that I know, or any stated policy, is anti-immigration. Perhaps you could explain how you get from "nationalism" to "anti-immigration".Yet you didn't highlight the policies which lead to that end.
That's because your logic to get there is off. For instance, immigration. No conservative that I know, or any stated policy, is anti-immigration. Perhaps you could explain how you get from "nationalism" to "anti-immigration".
Perhaps you could be specific. Why was Romney opposed to the Dream Act?The Heritage Foundation's recently stated view/ study results. Romney's opposition to the Dream Act. The 2012 Constitution party nominee's statemetns during the debate.
How does that equate with the modern definition of an American Conservative, one who holds reverence for the US Constitution?
You don't hold reverence to the Constitution....you hold reverence to what the right wing media tells that it REALLY means. Otherwise dumb shit like Roe v. Wade and gay rights wouldn't even be an issue for you...Nor Obamacare...which was deemed CONSTITUTIONAL by the SCOTUS....who know a HELL of a lot more about what is and is not Constitutional than your dumb ass...or the right wing media for that matter.
The issue with you guys is that you give it Biblical significaance...that it was penned by the hand of God and nothing is up for interpretation or debate.