A conservative's wet dream....
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
uscitizen
Villified User
so is Blackwater in Iraq....
uscitizen
Villified User
sure are, you ought to see their expense reports.
Here's the problem cawacko.
I've had a running experiment going on for a couple months.... Starting with the premise that NeoCons and Libertarians hated the New Deal, they thought it was one of the worst things that happened to america, and also hated the other progressive changes that grew out of the new dea.
I decided to go beyond this simple rhetoric, and challenge these people to identify specifically which parts of the new deal and progressive reforms and programs they either would never have implemented in the first place, or would eliminate NOW if they had the chance.
Everything from minimum wage laws, to banking and securities reforms after the 1929 crash, to prohibition of child labor, to US Environmental protection, to consumer saftey laws.
And these anti-New Dealers can hardly pick out anything they would get rid off....or wouldn't have implemented in the first place. Sure, there's some babble about tinkering around the margins (e.g., putting a small part of the SS trust fund in bonds and securities, instead of T-notes).
And sure, eventually cons will get angry (or funny) on the thread, and claim they want to eliminate everything.
But, fundamentally, we evidently all agree with the fundemental need and premise for many of the progressive reforms and programs since 1933.
After contemplation I would change, at the very least, the implementation of all of them and eliminate some of them entirely. Of course, you call waiting until I've thought it through and then speaking "getting angry" because you are desperate to pretend that we agree on these issues and minimize the differences in the programs as I would implement them. It doesn't change that increasing the government as they did and their implementation of many of the programs is disagreeable to conservatives. Even in the ones that they wouldn't eliminate there is almost always changes that they would make to the programs that would be disagreeable to liberals or the neo-Progs.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Damn Damo... You DON'T get to say you would simply have implemented the same programs in a different manner. You have to either eliminate them entirely or keep them as inefficient as they are. You really should not attempt logic with Cypress... it shatters his little fantasy world.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"But, fundamentally, we evidently all agree with the fundemental need and premise for many of the progressive reforms and programs since 1933."
Where we disagree tool is on the implementation of the programs... not the concepts entirely (in most cases).
Where we disagree tool is on the implementation of the programs... not the concepts entirely (in most cases).
At least he admits to what I have been saying for a long time. That Conservatives and Democrats have much the same goals. Rather than dehumanizing each other with labels like 'uncompassionate' and other things. At least on this thread. Neocons have some points of agreement with him. It is nice to know that they are human too, even though I disagree with neocons almost as much as I disagree with neoprogs and liberals.
But you agree fundamentally, with a federal role in Consumer protection, work safety and minimum wage laws, environmental protection, civil rights, regulation of interstate commerce, and things that either promote the general welfare or protect life and property: National Hurricane Service, CDC, National Weather service.
We are in fundamental agreement, that these progressive reforms and services were needed.
If you want to tinker with implmentation and organization, thats fine.
Yes, I agree, let SF and Damo "tinker"...it will give them something to do and keep them out of our hair while we implement more visionary programs, and then, they can "tinker" with them too.
I like it. Tinkering. It's the perfect job. Good work Cypress!
Which is what we stated. There is a large difference in implementation that you deny here.
I have long stated and tried to explain to people like Desh that fundamentally Conservatives and Liberals have much the same goals, just a different map and a fundamental disconnect in how much to trust the government to provide for them. To say that they like it all because they wouldn't eliminate them when they would make fundamental changes in implementation that the liberals would freak all over and scream "cuts!" like a Touret's patient seems to escape your mind.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
It is not tinkering ya tool. In many of the programs it would be more of a complete overhaul.
As for the National weather service and national hurricane service, no I do not think they are necessary. Nor do I think the minimum wages laws should be done at the Federal level.
LOL
Cons are like speed bumps in the road of progressive change. Their role is to slow it down.
LOL
Cons are like speed bumps in the road of progressive change. Their role is to slow it down.
I see they put their heads together and are trying to negotiate for a bigger title "overhaulers" rather than tincklers.
If they squeak enough, I think we can give it to them, as long as they don't expect a raise.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Tell me Cypress... do you really consider the changes I would make to SS... "tinkering"?
or Welfare???
or Medicare, Medicaid, minimum wages etc????
or Welfare???
or Medicare, Medicaid, minimum wages etc????
Right, conservatives have run on smaller government before and won. That Bush didn't and ran on "compassionate" (read: constitutionally and fiscally liberal) conservatism won't change that running on a platform of smaller government can win elections.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Who said ANYTHING about running on these issues you friggin dishonest tool??? These are NOT major issues to me. YOU are the one who asked if I would keep them... I said no. Fucking idiot.
LOL. He'd be, like I said earlier, shouting "cuts" like a touret's patient.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LOL
Cons are like speed bumps in the road of progressive change. Their role is to slow it down.
If you truly want progress... then quit fighting the changes to outdated and poorly run social service programs. What you fail to realize is that most of these programs can be run better, but you libs use scare tactics to frighten voters into believing change is bad. Social security is a perfect example. Someone says "personal accounts" or "privatize" and you idiots start yelling...
"they are going to steal the money from seniors" or " you will lose all your money in the stock market"
Blah blah blah....