|
|
| |
Topic: What Is the Future of Conservatism? |
What Is the Future of Conservatism?
Commentary Magazine, by Jonah Goldberg
|
|
Original Article
|
|
Posted By:JoniTx, 1/7/2013 9:14:31 AM
|
| Like the ancient parable of the blind men describing the same elephant from different perspectives, conservatism can mean many different things to many different people. Indeed, given the relatively straightforward and down-to-earth meaning of the word,conservatism actually lends itself to considerable linguistic legerdemain. One can use the word to refer to a temperament, an ideology (or ideologies), an objective tendency, or simply an unwillingness to heed the forces of progress as fashion dictates. It seems to me that the future of each of these varieties of conservatism is assured. The conservative temper stems from the crooked timber of humanity
|
 
Reply 1 - Posted by:
WAN2, 1/7/2013 9:32:33 AM (No. 9102896)
Cultural elites have successfully defined an advancing civilization as one that moves left and have control of everything that reinforces that image. So long as the people are happy with their Cheetos and beer (and Dancing With The Stars) the rot will continue unabated.
|
Reply 2 - Posted by:
fayebeck, 1/7/2013 9:42:26 AM (No. 9102919)
Let´s just continue looking for the "perfect" conservative. We already "know" who the "Rinos" are.
|
| |
|
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Redneck In NY, 1/7/2013 9:59:40 AM (No. 9102970)
Well according to the girls at Politico, it´s Bill Kristol.
|
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Blue-Z-Anna, 1/7/2013 10:14:23 AM (No. 9103009)
He wears a bow-tie and doesn´t mind being shouted down.
He sounds like WFB and therefore need not be listened to.
He´s old,white,fat,a bad dancer and no fun.
He´s very flexible and cheerful even when being gang-loved by the opposition.
|
Reply 5 - Posted by:
yuban, 1/7/2013 11:08:06 AM (No. 9103101)
More ant-Conservative rhetoric. Gee, go figure.
|
Reply 6 - Posted by:
StormCnter, 1/7/2013 11:41:37 AM (No. 9103183)
#5, I don´t get your logic. Why is an analysis of the different types of conservatives automatically "anti-conservative"? Jonah Goldberg can hardly be described as such. And on an earlier thread, you label Bill Kristol as being anti-conservative. Bill Kristol!! Moreover, you seem to be infected with the idea that I am "anti-conservative", as you have accused on a whole bunch of threads. I suggest that your opinion extends to those with whom you disagree, but that doesn´t mean you are correct. There are many kinds of conservatives with a variety of priorities. For me, smaller government and fiscal responsibility trumps just about everything. I´m in complete line with Kristol and Goldberg on that issue.
|
Reply 7 - Posted by:
OdinsAcolyte, 1/7/2013 12:34:00 PM (No. 9103286)
war
|
| |
|
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Stopstoreload, 1/7/2013 10:03:07 PM (No. 9104076)
Conservatism has a legitimate future, but not if it allows itself to be weakened by every nut fringe idea that comes along. Nut fringe ideas are those that seek to identify legitimate members of the broader party as being Rino´s, that want to disparage the Boehners and McConnells as know- nothings or traitors, and that take cheap, needlessly hurtful shots on subjects they understand not.
These are the people who live in the ideological cold water flats over the candy stores, and who emerge in times of stress to show their abysmal ignorance.
Read this carefully, look around you, and employ some moderation and common sense. Eschew the mad dogs.
|
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "JoniTx"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Most Recent Articles posted by "JoniTx"
|
|
Obama admits he’s a socialist
|
|
New York Post, by Kyle Smith
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:59:42 PM
Post Reply
|
|
You may be forgiven if you missed it during last week’s tsunami of scandals, but President Obama finally let slip that he is a socialist. Buried in the 17th paragraph of one of those mewling New York Times pieces on the woes of Obama — can we start calling him Woe-bama yet? — appeared these two words: “going Bulworth.” Obama himself, the Times explained, has been “longingly” telling his inner circle that what he’d really like to do is what Sen. Jay Bulworth, played by Warren Beatty in his 1998 movie “Bulworth,” did: to go public as
|
Candy Crowley: Is it Possible
This Isn´t Political and
IRS Didn´t Intend to Harass
the Tea Party?
|
|
Newsbusters, by Noel Sheppard
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:54:02 PM
Post Reply
|
|
"Can you see in your mind´s eye a way that this might not have been political, that this was a misguided stupid way to sort, but that they didn´t intend it to be some kind of political attempt to harass the Tea Party?" So actually asked CNN´s Candy Crowley of her guest Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) concerning the Internal Revenue Service scandal Sunday (video follows with transcript and commentary):CANDY CROWLEY, HOST: Moving on to the IRS problem at this moment, which is really sort of in its infancy. There will be lots more hearings coming up this week
|
| |
|
WH: Legality of IRS Action
Against Conservatives ´Irrelevant´
|
|
Breitbart Big Government, by Staff
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:43:10 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Appearing on Sunday morning on ABC News’ This Week, White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer told a credulous George Stephanopoulos that the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups was “inexcusable,” and that the law with regard to the activity was “irrelevant.” “I can’t speak to the law here,” he said. “The law is irrelevant. The activity was outrageous and inexcusable, and it was stopped and it needs to be fixed so we ensure it never happens again.” When asked for clarification, Pfeiffer expounded: “What I mean is, whether it’s legal or illegal is not important to the fact
|
WH: ´Irrelevant´ Who
Edited Benghazi Talking Points
|
|
Breitbart Big Government, by William Bigelow
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:40:46 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Appearing on CBS’ Face the Nation, White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said that it was “largely irrelevant” who edited the talking points the Obama administration trotted out in the aftermath of the terrorist attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Host Bob Schieffer asked, “That was just a PR plan, to send out somebody who didn’t know anything about what had happened. Why did you do that? Why didn’t the Secretary of State come and tell us what they knew, and if they knew nothing, say ‘We don’t know yet?’ …. Why are you here today?
|
WH: ´Irrelevant´ Where Obama
Was During Benghazi Attacks
|
|
Breitbart Big Government, by Ben Shapiro
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:37:54 PM
Post Reply
|
|
On Fox News Sunday this morning, White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer was asked by Chris Wallace where in the White House President Obama was during the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans. “Question,” asked Wallace. “What did the President do the rest of that night to pursue Benghazi?” Pfeiffer answered, “Look, the President was kept up to date on this as it was happening the entire night, from the moment it started until the very end …. I recognize that there’s a series of conspiracy theories Republicans have been spinning about it
|
Non-deportation rate
drops — to 99.2 percent
|
|
Washington Times [DC], by Stephen Dinan
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: JoniTx- 5/19/2013 3:28:53 PM
Post Reply
|
|
The Homeland Security Department has granted legal status to 99.2 percent of all illegal immigrants who have applied under President Obama’s new non-deportation policy for young adults, according to the latest numbers released Friday. That’s a slight drop from the 99.5 percent approval rate reported last month. The policy, known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, grants legal status to most illegal immigrants under the age of 31 who came to the U.S. before age 16 — usually brought by their parents. They are allowed to remain in the U.S. without fear of deportation, and are given work
|
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
|
Analyze this
|
|
Power Line, by Scott Johnson
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: MissMolly- 5/19/2013 11:33:33 AM
Post Reply
|
|
What did President Obama do on the evening of 9/11/12 when our men were under attack in Benghazi? The invaluable Andrew McCarthy reminds us that Obama and Secretary Clinton had a 10:00 p.m. phone call of which many (including, I think, Chris Wallace) have lost sight. This morning when Wallace asked Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer what Obama was up to that evening, Pfeiffer declared the line of inquiry “offensive.” Translation: Obama and his minions would prefer to “move on” and are warning the likes of FNC off:(Snip for video)The Weekly Standard’s Daniel Halper has posted the rush transcript
|
| |
|
Evidence emerges that Obama
administration official knew of
IRS targeting during 2012 campaign
|
|
CBS News, by Margaret Brennan
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: earlybird- 5/18/2013 9:01:39 PM
Post Reply
|
|
WASHINGTON - There were new questions Saturday night concerning if anyone in the White House was aware of the IRS´ targeting of conservative groups. Inspector General Russell George said he informed a deputy at the Treasury Department in June of 2012 about the probe into the IRS. The Treasury Department confirmed the timeline but said they did not know the details of the investigation until last week.(Snip)Marcus Owens ran the tax-exempt division at the IRS for 10 years. He said it isn´t difficult to figure out who´s doing what at the agency.
|
Camelot Is Burning
|
|
Breitbart´s Big Government, by Christopher Burton
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: mitzi- 5/18/2013 8:16:11 PM
Post Reply
|
|
It began in earnest last Friday. A flash mob of latte drinking, tofu eating media that has done its best to quell, rather than fan the flames of truth, turned on one of their own. Jay Carney lay bludgeoned at the base of the podium, a victim of friendly fire. Ironically, the attack was reminiscent of the one in Benghazi he has repeatedly denied the Administration he represents bears any responsibility for. “Changed twelve times?!” came the cries. And with good reason. We were misled; no, lied to.
|
Watergate 2.0 -- why the
IRS scandal is far worse
|
|
Fox News, by Matt Kibbe
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: StormCnter- 5/18/2013 5:59:17 AM
Post Reply
|
|
In the wake of one of the worst abuses of government power in recent history, many are rushing to frame the Internal Revenue Service scandal as simply an attack on conservative activists. That view risks creating a partisan political football and misses a fundamentally scarier abuse that exceeds the scandals of Watergate or any other prior government abuse. The IRS has admitted that since May 2010 it targeted grassroots-conservative organizations that had applied for tax-exempt status, unfairly subjecting them to rigorous scrutiny due to their political leanings. Such groups were told they were required to comply with IRS requests,
|
Lew asks Congress for debt increase,
says it’s ´not open to debate´
|
|
The Hill, by Peter Schoeder
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: DW626- 5/18/2013 6:12:33 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew on Friday urged congressional leaders to raise the debt limit and insisted that the White House is not going to negotiate over the increase because lawmakers have "no choice." "We will not negotiate over the debt limit," Lew wrote. "The creditworthiness of the United States is non-negotiable. The question of whether the country must pay obligations it has already incurred is not open to debate." Lew said that while President Obama is willing to discuss plans to reduce the nation´s deficit with Congress, those talks must be kept separate from any effort to raise the nation´s debt cap.
|
McCaskill Calls For Firing Of All
Involved In IRS Targeting Scandal
|
|
KMOX [St, Louis], by Staff
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: BuckeyeRon- 5/18/2013 2:46:31 PM
Post Reply
|
|
Washington – Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-MO, issued a video statement Friday in response to reports that the Internal Revenue Service unfairly targeted conservative nonprofit groups. (Snip) “There’s a reason Lady Justice wears a blindfold in America. That is because in America, we don’t apply the law based on who you are, who you know, or what you believe. We apply the law equally.” “We should not only fire the head of the IRS, which has occurred, but we’ve got to go down the line and find every single person who had anything to do with this and make sure
|
| |
|
Higher-Ups Knew of IRS Case
|
|
Wall Street Journal, by John D. McKinnon*
Original Article
|
|
Posted By: Dreadnought- 5/17/2013 10:23:18 PM
Post Reply
|
|
The Internal Revenue Service´s watchdog told top Treasury officials around June 2012 he was investigating allegations the tax agency had targeted conservative groups, for the first time indicating that Obama administration officials were aware of the explosive matter in the midst of the president´s re-election campaign. The disclosure to the Treasury general counsel and the deputy secretary was a cursory one, according to J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration. He said he didn´t reveal conclusions of the probe, which was in its early stages, and his disclosure came as part
|
| | |
|
|
