Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Remember Conservatives?

While we tend to talk in general terms about a conservative president and a conservative Congress, the reality is we have neither. Genuine conservatism opposes rampant deficit spending, expansion of government and aggressive internationalism, all hallmarks of this administration.

But now, the theo-con president and theo-con Congress have been sufficiently weakened by the consequences of their devastating actions that, much like disenfranchised liberals, disenfranchised conservatives are daring to assert themselves. The Washington Times reports that conservatives want the House leadership battle to address not just the theo-con's unending power-hunger, but also fundamental principles about the party and its philosophical approach to the nature of governance.

Whichever side you're on politically, it seems to make sense to with them luck.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

<< the theo-con president and theo-con Congress have been sufficiently weakened by the consequences of their devastating actions >>

Oooo, yeah, they're soooo "weakened." You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? Keep telling yourself how "weak" they are. LOL

<< it seems to make sense to with them luck >>

Hmmm... I think you meant to type "wish" -- not "with". Be careful -- spellcheck won't save you when your screwups are spelled correctly. ;)

P.S. Don't feel bad. Now that I'VE chimed in, at least you'll get a bunch of comments. Enjoy.

Ol' Zeb said...

Hey Sparky, how's you week so far? Watching Joe Biden's head spin like a cat-5 hurricane should have improved your spirit.... Alito is a bright and skilled guy, but hearing a member of the Federalist Society say he has no agenda is like hearing the same line from a MoveOn.org supporter.

The legitimate conservatives embracing the values of the past (Hatfield and Packwood of Oregon type values come to mind) will eventually take back their party and the bible-beating buncombe-artists will slither back to their pulpits to take advantage of the poor and hopeless.

Anonymous said...

Hiya Zeb.

EVERYONE has an agenda. If Kerry had won, the senate would now be questioning a liberal judge trying to mask his/her agenda. But Bush won, so the Supreme Court will now get a conservative judge. That's just how it goes.

Next issue...

My feeling is, about 95% of what you call "the poor and hopeless" could be a lot less poor and hopeless if they would help themselves... instead of hoping some misguided politician with delusions of Robin Hood rapes me of what I work hard for in order to give the "poor and hopeless" (a.k.a. the dumb and lazy) a free ride -- on my back.

Yes, I know... that sentiment makes me "insensitive" and "mean."

Ol' Zeb said...

No, Sparky, I do not believe your comments indicate that you are mean or insensitive.

Perhaps you tithe at a church that assists folks who can't make it on their own. Maybe you are a school teacher trying to leverage your knowledge into helping educate several hundreds of people over your lifetime.

It might be that you are very generous but simply hate giving the out-of-control bureaucracy your money with neither your oversight nor control. (In that specific case we may have something in common.)

So, what do you believe is the optimal way to deal with the infirm and the dumb and the lazy? I'm guessing that the WPA and the CCC are not your favorite ideas from The New Deal, so what do you believe is the most efficacious and/or most efficient plan?

kenoshamarge said...

When people work two minimum wage jobs to try and make ends meet does that make them dumb or lazy?

Such sweeping generalities are always foolish.

The poor get far less government handouts than the corporations. Why doesn't that outrage you? Easier to kick those that are down isn't it?Another compassionate conservative.

Anonymous said...

<< The poor get far less government handouts than the corporations. Why doesn't that outrage you? >>

Because people who work at corporations get up early every morning, go to work, and accomplish things. They also speak English, take showers, and generally have nice, clean homes. They pay taxes and behave like responsible citizens.

They do not lounge around in front of convenience stores, drunk on booze, high on paint fumes, urinating on themselves and asking me for money... so they can buy more booze, and more paint.

Does that answer your question?

You care so much about the poor and downtrodden? I have an idea for you. Whatever money you make (AFTER TAXES), just donate 60% of that money to the homeless. Donate it to people on welfare. Give it to Mexican illegal aliens. Believe me, they'll all be happy to accept it from you (their hands are already out).

You can live on 40% of the money you keep after taxes -- if you really WANT to. So, why not take my advice? Give the majority of the money you make (take-home) away to poor people. You can live on less -- if you WANT to.

But I'm guessing you won't take me up on my suggestion. Nah, you've got to get yourself that new laptop this year, right? Gotta take that fun vacation. Gotta buy yourself that nice new jacket. Lots of fun stuff to buy, right?

How can you treat yourself to such luxuries when there are people with NO HOMES? People with not enough food? Christ, how do you sleep at night?

Stop posting on blogs. Stop paying for DSL service. Give most of your money away to the poor people you care so deeply about.

Anonymous said...

<< When people work two minimum wage jobs to try and make ends meet does that make them dumb or lazy? >>

No. It just makes them dumb.

kenoshamarge said...

Such poisonous hatred spewed with every keystroke would suggest that you are not doing all that well. If so, what are you so angry about? Dumb, okay, maybe I am. I work hard, get up early everyday and go to work and don't make enough to make ends meet. New laptop? Nice vacation? In my dreams. As usual in your rush to spout more bile you were wrong. Oh, and quit patting yourself on the back for more people posting. I suspect that most people do as I usually do whenever I see a troll present, I just move on. No chance for a decent conversation here.

Anonymous said...

<< I suspect that most people do as I usually do whenever I see a troll present >>

Think about what you just said. You don't like my point of view, so you call me a "troll." Pardon me, but isn't calling people names "poisonous hatred spewed?"

Maybe you're suggesting that since you feel I spewed poisonous hatred, it's now okay for YOU to, as well. Two wrongs make a right? I guess that's how you think.

Too bad that instead of refuting my points of view, all you can do is call me names.

And WHO'S intolerant? Hmmm?

<< I suspect that most people do as I usually do -- I just move on >>

Um, no you don't. You've left two comments here, attacking me. Not just one. Two. That's not moving on. That's typing comments. You're even confused about your own behavior.

And say what you will, it IS me who creates the most discussion on this blog -- that's irrefutable. I suspect even the host would agree.

So, when you say you suspect most people do as you do, "Move on," you're wrong AGAIN. When I comment, you see tons more comments. When I don't, there's usually zero or one. Proving that you're wrong AGAIN (when you suggested that most people just "move on").

Try commenting again, and let's see if you can get ANYTHING right. I'm dubious.

Ol' Zeb said...

Hey Sparky! (Do you wish us to refer to you as 'dubious' now?)

I concur in referring to you as a "troll" because you choose not to engage in meaningful dialog. F'rinstance, you stated a point about the welfare system, I asked a question, then you went off on a tangent. I even gave you a couple of places to jab where we might agree to start a dialog. You chose to ignore them.

I occasionally feed peanuts to the bushy-tailed rat in the tree out front; I call it a squirrel. I don't expect any informative conversation with it either, but it also fun to play with.

Anonymous said...

<< I concur in referring to you as a "troll" because you choose not to engage in meaningful dialog. >>

Judged by whose standards? Yours? So nice that YOU determine what's "meaningful."

And by the way... who do you really is "playing" with who?

Oh, and by the way, notice we've now reached double-digit posts under this topic. Looks like I've done it again. The host really should pay me a fee, don't you think? Without me, no one really cares to chat much, now do they?

Once again... WHO is playing with WHO here?

Think about it, Ol' Zeb.

P.S. Make sure you get out there and support Hillary!

LOL

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that there's a misunderstanding liberals have... they believe that if conservatives simply knew "the facts" they'd change their minds. It doesn't work that way. Conservatives know their facts just like liberals know theirs... but unlike liberals, conservatives don't -want- to change anybody's mind. If you're too slow to get with the program, you're the sort of mental defective who hurts whichever side he stands for. The last thing they want is for you to change sides.

Only liberals are interested in discussion. Conservatives only interest in talking to liberals is in watching them trip over themselves. If you search for common ground you search alone.

Anonymous said...

<< Do you wish us to refer to you as 'dubious' now? >>

For those of you who don't understand this comment above, let me help you. It's a level of comedy that may well be over your head.

See, in one of my previous posts, I ended by saying I was dubious. I wrote "I'm dubious." So, Ol' Zeb said, "Do you wish us to refer to you as 'dubious' now?"

You see??? Do you get it?! I said "I'm dubious" so Ol' Zeb then "zings" me by asking if I want to be CALLED dubious! Like as a name! Zing!

It would be sorta like if I said, "Hey, call me a cab" and Ol' Zeb responded, "YOU'RE A CAB!!!"

Ok, ok, ok... I'll give you a minute to let you catch your breath, because I know how hard you must be laughing at Ol' Zeb's joke.

Tick... tick... tick... (waiting)...

There. Did you catch your breath? Are you ok now? Good. Now let's sit back and wait for Ol' Zeb's next comedic gem. I know it will be just as funny... or maybe even funnier!

Ol' Zeb said...

Take my party...please! [baddaboomZING!]

I'm not trying to convert Sparky, and I don't get the impression he is trying to convert me. I view this interplay more like kids poking a bug with a stick -- mild curiosity, but no expectations of any great epiphany.

I make lots of mistakes; I depend on people explaining to me my mistake, not just pushing the buzzer and saying, "Oh, so sorry, but thanks for playing!" I don't have all the answers, so I asked Sparky how he would deal with the "huddled masses" expecting some level of discussion. It was not to be.

There is no contract on this blog binding us to constructive discussion. Ya' takes it as it comes. I poked a bug with a stick and it raised its butt. Not that I really expected it to spin around and say, "Excuse me, sir, but would you not do that -- and if you would like, I'll explain why you shouldn't do such things...."

Anonymous said...

Hey, Ol' Zeb. Enough with your animal and bug metaphors. Christ, how many of them is enough? Yeah yeah, I know, "Sparky is like a hedgehog, and I'm the guy with a hedgehog stun gun, stunning this hedgehog which is Sparky." Will THAT be your next comment?

Or will it go more like, "You know what, fellow liberals, this Sparky is nothing more than a hamster, and I'm spinning his political wheel! Yeah, me, Ol' Zeb! Did ya hear that, Sparky? You're a muskrat, and now I'm gonna poke you with my muskrat poker! Because I'm Ol' Zeb!!!"

Yawn.

It's old, Ol' Zeb. Yes, we all get it. I'm a dumb little animal (or insect), and you're the genius feeding me, poking me, or petting me. Yes. You're so superior.

The truth is, you're just another impotent liberal, and when you can't deal with my assessments, you make your cute little animal/insect analogies, ostensibly to "put me in my place." It's sooooo effective.

Shall we expect more? Hope not. Now go put on your little creative thinking cap and come up with a new approach. If you can. Good luck.

P.S. The Supreme Court just moved another notch to the right. My boys win again. HA!

Anonymous said...

haha

talking stink bug look funny with stick up ass

Anonymous said...

<< talking stink bug look funny with stick up ass >>

Yes. Ha ha. My goodness, you're witty.

"talking stink bug look funny with stick up ass "

Wow! I mean, that IS FUNNY. MAN! I can't compete with comedy like that... and so blisteringly on target! Whoa, I'd try to take you on, but I know that would be foolish of me.

Why, you might even come back with something MORE funny and caustic than "talking stink bug look funny with stick up ass".

Oh, Jesus. I have to go catch my breath. That was too good. You got me. Touche!

Anonymous said...

Last night I licked Marjorie Swanson's pussy.

Newer Post Older Post Home