View Single Post
Old 07-05-2008, 08:28 AM   #4 (permalink)
okpfloyd
Senior Member
Points: 2,384, Level: 29 Points: 2,384, Level: 29 Points: 2,384, Level: 29
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 352
My Mood:
Thanks: 20
Thanked 29 Times in 16 Posts
okpfloyd is a normal PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by PursuitOfHappinessParty View Post
It appear the MSM, citizens, and government officials use whatever definition suits themselves best, as in all things American.

To me?

Conservatism is conservative to the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Abuses and contradictions are not to be allowed. This leaves my conservatism to mean:

1) Minimal government impact on citizens and their businesses.
2) Fiscal responsibility by the government.
3) Maximizing citizen rights.
4) Direct following of the will of the citizens, true citizen representation.

Conservatism thus allows for healthy business practices, balanced governmental budgets, eradication of vice laws, serious criminal prosecution, corporation warriness, strong but not insane military allowances, sane foreign policy, sane budgets, and the like.

A conservative government would then be able to protect the citizen and citizens plural from each other, foreign influences, and corporations (monopolies and my newest leastest buddy mega-corporations), as well as the ecology. True conservatism protects citizens and their money, not pandering to special interest corporations.
If only your ideas of true conservatism were actually practiced in the last 7.5 years then that would have been a positive.

If we were to not look back and assume these principals were to be practiced in the future do you see the candidate who represents "conservatism" as viable?

Long way to go yo from where we are now...good luck.
okpfloyd is offline   Top Reply With Quote