Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, September 26, 2008
John Hawkins :: Townhall.com Columnist
What Conservatism Isn't
by John Hawkins
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



If you closely follow politics, one thing you'll learn is that liberals often go to great lengths to try to hide what they really believe from the public while conservatives inevitably seem to be trying to correct some misperception that has been spread about them.

So, as a creature of the Right and as someone who knows other conservatives well, I'd like to do something a little out of the ordinary. I'd like to take the time to explain what we conservatives are NOT so that people who aren't that familiar with conservatism can know when they're being fed a plateful of baloney about what we believe.

Conservatives don't dislike minorities: Few things outrage conservatives more than the fact that liberals are forever accusing us of hating this or that group for the flimsiest of reasons. Yes, there are a few racist conservatives, just like there are racist liberals and moderates. However, judging by the number of race-based attacks on minority conservatives by the Left, the Right as a whole is considerably less racist than our brethren on the Left.

Conservatives don't want women kept barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen: Conservatives have much more respect for stay-at-home mothers than the Left does and therefore, we don't look down our noses at women who want to be at home with the kids while their husband works.

For people who say that means conservatives just want women to be subservient to men, I have two words for you: Sarah Palin. She's a working mother shooting for the second most powerful position in the land. Conservatives love her and liberals hate her in large part for the exact same reason: she's a living, breathing stereotype killer.

Conservatives aren't anti-science: One of the great ironies of modern life is that liberals, a group that regularly tries to whip up scientifically unjustifiable hysteria for political gain, has consistently tried to brand conservatives as being "anti-science."

Have you ever noticed how that plays out in say, the global warming debate? On the Right, you have people constantly quoting actual studies and scientists as they make an argument while on the Left, they're quoting Al Gore and telling you sketchy stories about how the polar bears are all going to die if we don't do something right this second! Honestly, which side sounds like it's more interested in actual scientific facts as opposed to political propaganda masquerading as science?

"Conservative" and "Republican" aren't necessarily the same thing: Most conservatives are Republicans, but much to the chagrin of the Right, far too many Republicans, even ones claiming to be conservative, don't act in a conservative fashion.

For example, during his time in office, George Bush has been ferociously criticized by conservatives for out-of-control spending, expansions of government power, and his stand on illegal immigration. That's not to say that conservatives don't agree with the Republican Party on most issues -- because we do -- but you should never forget that "conservative" and "Republican" are most definitely two different things.

Conservatives aren't theocrats: People who aren't Christians -- or alternately are believers, but don't take their faith seriously -- sometimes accuse conservatives of wanting to disregard the Constitution in order to implement a theocracy.

Never, in my entire career as a writer, have I seen a prominent conservative advocate such a thing and never, in my entire life, have I met a single conservative who believes in doing such a thing. This idea has slightly less resonance on the Right than making Nancy Pelosi House Majority Leader for life.

Conservatives rig the elections: This is a theme that has been taken up by the Left after their chosen candidates went down in flames during the last two presidential elections. However, if conservatives are rigging elections, why in the world did we allow the Democrats to take over Congress in 2006?

Moreover, if you look at cases of election malfeasance where someone is actually prosecuted for doing something wrong as opposed to imaginary cases where something "must" be going on because the wrong candidate lost, you'll find that the Left is much more likely to engage in election fraud than the Right.

Conservatives don't want to pollute the environment: Here's a little secret you will seldom hear from environmental groups: the environment is in pretty good shape here in the United States. We don't have Bejing-like pollution in the air, uninhabitable radioactive wastelands like the Ukraine, and people regularly drinking contaminated well water like you'll find in India.

This is where the Left and Right differ. Conservatives are concerned about clean water, clean air, and a clean environment while the left-wing environmental groups have become increasingly hysterical over trivia and dubious problems, like global warming, in order to keep their fundraising going. So. if you're interested in environmental issues that might actually have some measurable impact on your life and your health, the Right is just as concerned as the Left about the environment.

Conservatives aren't in the pocket of the rich: When it comes to the rich, the biggest difference between the Left and the Right is that conservatives don't resent successful people for their success. Add to that a healthy respect for capitalism that isn't present on the Left and you get a generally favorable attitude towards business and successful people.

That being said, it is the Right, not the Left that is the greatest foe of corporate welfare and businesses that profit from illegal immigration. That's one of the biggest reasons why, despite what you'd expect, big business is much friendlier to the Left than you'd think given their socialistic attitudes.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
John Hawkins is a professional blogger who runs Right Wing News, Linkiest, and Viral Footage.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Pasadena Phil
Pasadena Phil you are obviously receiving your information from one of the MSM, who continually bash George Bush and John McCain, but your information is always tainted because this is what they live for. This occurred by liberal policies, created by Democratic Presidents both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton who relaxed or removed regulations and restriction for Mortgage Companies in order for liberal Democrats to get votes from minorities. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd both made it their policy as head of the financial/banking committee’s in this Congress. Let’s loan money to people who can’t pay it back, we will look like saints and will be known as the party who cares.

They allowed minorities to purchase homes they could not afford or pay back without any restrictions or financial background checks. Great business decisions these democratic presidents made, which the rest of Americans will be forced to pay for policies these former President’s made, not our current President. But, if you want me to point fingers, I can also tell you that Bush told Congress 17 times to look at these policies and fix them regarding Fannie and Freddie, 17 times and what did our democratic Congress do? Absolutely nothing and the reasons why they choose not to do anything was partisan politics. They wanted to blame Republicans in Congress as well as the President. Great role models you got there Phil.

John McCain co-sponsored the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005. This Bill was to create an oversight Committee to monitor both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. President Bush said he would sign the Senate Bill S 190. This is what John McCain said when speaking to the Senate. “If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.” Tell me again who looking out for Americans?


conservatives and the environment
The air and the water is in pretty good shape because of government regulations. There was a time when they were as bad as anywhere.

Democrats are the most hateful
Democrats have made a career out of bashing and mocking Christian Conservatives. Yet the democrats are the most vile, evil and manipulative of all political parties within the United States One thing for sure is we can always count on Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in a time of crisis, still want to play political games. I really and truly believe they think they are fooling Americans. The fact that Harry Reid called the President to tell him to bring John McCain to Washington to later turn around to tell the drooling liberal press that the Democrats had a deal and John McCain stopped it. This was clearly planned and instigated by the democrats in Congress in order to spread misleading lies to the public and this is only the beginning of the lies they have told.

They clearly no longer care about what the American public wants. We are all a bunch of uneducated, inbred, stupid and racist. They count on the fact that Americans aren’t intelligent because they are the enlighten ones who attended liberal Ivy League Universities, but Americans are much smarter and have attend universities and colleges that aren’t run by liberal Democrats. So who is smarter? Liberalism throughout the world is on the decline, when their political rhetoric no longer makes sense nor do their policies that have drive World Markets into the ground. The liberals in the House and Senate refuse to yield and admit that their liberal policies don’t work, and their idea is to blame President Bush and republicans, who longer hold the majority. Maybe you all need to go back and get a better education from those universities and college the rest of America attended. It’s pretty clear you have learned nothing by going to Ivy League Universities.

Nicholette said...
"There are real examples of republicans who hindered minorities (who usually vote democrat) from voting in both the 2000 and 2004 elections. This is fact."

Do you know where to find these "real examples?" I don't so maybe you can enlighten me. I'm not denying that it happened, but I'd like to see some evidence. I know Hawkins didn't provide evidence of his claims, either, so some leniency may be required. However, he referred, I think, to a body of evidence, but I haven't looked into his claims, either. That doesn't let you off the hook, Nicholette. You make a very strong statement: "This is fact." Ok. Prove it. Another thing is this: So what? If you're right, that doesn't prove that Hawkins is wrong.

Nicholette said...
"When you want to change the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman you ARE trying to impose your religion on the rest of the country. Same goes for pro-life agendas or advocating for the 10 commandments to be displayed in court houses."

These are moral issues, regardless of your religion or lack thereof. Muslims and Hindus also define marriage as being between a man and a woman. They are pro-life. They are for the idea that religious law is the foundation of governmental law. So how would taking these stands be imposing a religion on anyone? These are moral stands which are shared by many people of many religions.

Nicholette said...
"About 98% of scientist agree that global warming is real, it is caused by humans and is a serious threat to our planet. Global warming is NOT trivial!"

Please cite a source for you assertion. I would say you're most likely correct if you said "98% of scientists at global warming conventions agree that global warming is real." But you didn't say that. Is that what you meant? If not, please give us all a place we can go to see your opinion supported. I like your zeal, though. Here, let me try it.

75% of scientist say that global warming is real. 50% of those say it is caused by humans. 80% of those say it is a serious threat to our planet. 40% say that global warming is part of a natural cycle and will be followed, no matter what humans do, by global cooling. 50% say that concern about global warming is unwarranted!

How'd I do?

Nicholette said...
"Liberals are not more racist than Conservatives. Why do you think most minorities vote Democrat?"

Because they've been fed a lie and they believe it. Hence the necessity of an article like this which states the truth that conservatives are not racist. Someone needs to let that be known. Democrats aren't telling anybody.

craigers
Thanks for the link to Hayek's essay. I'm not sure what purpose the essay serves today. It was written in 1960. As a conservative, I certainly won't argue that conservatism has changed. Nothing has changed, yet many things have changed. In fact, the only constant is change, in a sense. One aspect of what makes us human, and, to varying degrees, conservative or liberal or socialist, is belief or disbelief in God and adherence to his principles or a lack thereof. When this, and myriad other considerations are taken into account, a lucid and concise definition of any of the political viewpoints is difficult to accomplish. I agree that a hard, scientific definition of the word conservative entails a resistance to change. Taken to the extreme, this could become a total resistance to all change. However, do you know ANYBODY who fits within that definition? I do not, and that characterization certainly doesn't fit me. So, should we say that there is no such thing as conservatism then? I don't think so. In fact we should point out that there is something akin to a sliding scale, with different people falling at different points on the scale. If there is a point somewhere in the middle which delineates a difference between conservative and liberal, most will find themselves on one side or the other. I feel that someone who is more conservative than liberal is, in fact, conservative, and vice versa. I don't know if this is logical, but it is the current reality.

Conservatives have to defend themselves?
The entire premise of this article is proven false by the body of the article. It states that conservatives are trying to correct misperceptions of themselves by the liberals while liberals have to hide who they are. Then the article continues to spread misperceptions about liberals!

Liberals are not more racist than Conservatives. Why do you think most minorities vote Democrat?

Liberals do not hate Palin because she's a stereotype killer. They hate her because she's unqualified and she was only chosen as a running mate because she's a woman.

About 98% of scientist agree that global warming is real, it is caused by humans and is a serious threat to our planet. Global warming is NOT trivial!

When you want to change the constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman you ARE trying to impose your religion on the rest of the country. Same goes for pro-life agendas or advocating for the 10 commandments to be displayed in court houses.

There are real examples of republicans who hindered minorities (who usually vote democrat) from voting in both the 2000 and 2004 elections. This is fact.

We are a nation by the people and for the people...all people rich or poor. Liberals believe in helping the poor amoung us. Not rewarding the rich and hope that some money might trickle down to the less fortunate.



Science Avenger said...
"And on racism, anyone who watched the lily white Republican convention should be laughing their asses off at Hawkins denials of the obvious."

What was obvious, science avenger? Please inform and enlighten us? If you love science so much, as you purport to do, why do you use hyperbole, instead of facts, to state your case? Why must you use profanity? Perhaps you should apply some critical thinking to your argument that racism is the obvious conclusion to the fact that the vast majority of people at the RNC were white. Perhaps you might find that very few people of color wanted to be at the RNC. I don't believe we should go out and recruit token minorities to attend the convention just so we can look good on TV. If minority members of the Republican Party wish to attend Party activities, they are certainly welcome to do so, and I defy you to prove otherwise. The Republican Party's doors are open to all who share our beliefs, and Hawkins is attempting to counter the propaganda which has kept many in the various minority communities from finding agreement with Republicans.

fishy - The problem with voting...
--
...goes even deeper.

Says fishy:

"...we, the American people, unfortunately, do not have control over who is chosen to be the candidates on the major 'tickets'. We are 'stuck' with the candidates the media and the powerful choose."


In a great many of these United States - notably New Jersey, where I have resided all my life - there is almost never any likelihood that the individual citizen's vote *COUNTS AT ALL*.

To explain, consider the possibility that I might (as our Republican friends suggest) "hold my nose" and cast my ballot in November to support the worthless POS their party has nominated for the presidency. Similarly, I vote for the GOP candidates for the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives.

New Jersey's electoral votes will in this year (as in virtually all years) go to the National Socialist Party's presidential candidate.

I might as well not have bothered to vote at all, mightn't I?

Inasmuch as the National Socialists of the northern counties and in the population centers of Camden and Gloucester counties vastly outnumber Republicans (not to mention us conservatives), my vote for a Republican standing for either house of Congress is utterly wasted, too.

This simple fact of life - particularly with regard to the Electoral College system - means that all over America there are people with no real reason to "hold their nose" for Crash Test Johnny, a Rockefeller Republican who has made no effort to disguise his abhorrence of American conservative principles and has striven to distance himself from adherence to the prescribed limitations of the U.S. Constitution.

So for me - and for just about all conservatives living in "Blue" states like New Jersey - voting Republican is just jerking off.

Might as well do it in support of political positions of which I *approve* instead of the stinking crap the GOP is peddling.

--

DEAR PISTOL
Though, I agree, Americans should intelligently vote for the best and most qualified candidate for President, we, the American people, unfortunately, do not have control over who is chosen to be the candidates on the major 'tickets'. We are 'stuck' with the candidates the media and the powerful choose.
Voting for a third party or writing in the name of any qualified person for President, DOES NOT help "We the People" regain control of our Government or our Country. Only a 'Revolt' by the majority of our citizens, such as refusal to pay taxes, will bring the Government, the powerful and the media to their knees and listen. That day will, indeed, eventually come. And may God help our childrens children when it does.
But, until, then, please do consider voting for the lesser of two 'evils'--at least 'Conservative' values are rooted in moral ground, even if the 'crop' that's grown from these roots have been blighted by the liberal left.

Our country
is in deep doo doo because the voters have been voting strategically. They vote for identity, or against someone, or lesser of two evils, or pocketbook, or to get even or some other personal issue. For everything, except the greatest good for the greatest number. When voters vote for venal reasons they find venal candidates to express their prejudices. Venal representatives give us venal govt.

I am through voting for any reason except for the best candidate. As flawed as Obama is, i will not merely vote for McCain as a ploy to keep Obama out of office. McCain has far too much baggage for me. I was going to vote Obama in the faint hope he might rise to the job, but as his record and background came out, i dropped that idea. Now it will be some third party unknown. Better the unknown than a guarantee of business as usual. If half of the incumbents are replaced this year, we will see a renewed respect for voter desires in DC. For starters, enforcing the immigration laws.

SJ DOC's reply #1
I find it hillarious that SJ Doc, the #1 reply has a quote that is from F. A Hayek's great essay, "why I am not a conservative." An essay all those who think they are conservative must read. Found here at

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/hayek1.html

A prime exapmle is that Mr Hawkins tells us what a conservative is not, but what is a conservatative for? Please read Haykes fantastic essay and discover again what Classical liberalism is! [if you think it has anything to do with modern neo liberalism, you are a bloated bovine brianed boob] It this this philosophy which founded our great nation!

''Liberals'' are a minority...
--
...and I most assuredly hate *THEM*.

Does this mean I have to turn in my Conservative Secret Society ultrasonic whistle and decoder ring?





=====
"Conservatism proper is a legitimate, probably necessary, and certainly widespread attitude of opposition to drastic change. It has, since the French Revolution, for a century and a half played an important role in European politics. Until the rise of socialism its opposite was liberalism. There is nothing corresponding to this conflict in the history of the United States, because what in Europe was called 'liberalism' was here the common tradition on which the American polity had been built: thus the defender of the American tradition was a liberal in the European sense. This already existing confusion was made worse by the recent attempt to transplant to America the European type of conservatism, which, being alien to the American tradition, has acquired a somewhat odd character. And some time before this, American radicals and socialists began calling themselves 'liberals'."

-- Friedrich von Hayek (1960)

THE Stance
My own view is that there are things in the Republican Platform that I am much easier with than with the Dem.'s platform. I can see much that I can support in the Republican standards than with the Dem's standards. If you believe in the Practice of Prayer with Faith in God, it is easier it seems to share that in the Christians's views of support for the Moral value system that we should all hold dear to our hearts. I found my own stance changing when I got married, the views of the Dem.'s and the view of the Republicans were a bit harder to decifer many years ago in some ways. Yet I considered myself a Christian even though I had been voting as a Dem's supporter prior to my being married. Now I support the Republican's view, as the lines are more clear it seems. So my stance has changed over the course of my being married verses being single and living in a family of 'Dem's'. Harder to vote Republican when one has lived in a Dem's family . I support what is supportive of the Scripture, and when it doesn't then I have a harder time of choosing what should be done. Clearing up the 'fog' between what is Conservative, and Republican was helpful to me, even though one usually connects those of the Republican party as being Conservative, I know there are Dem's who are Christian at least in their understanding and still attend the same Church I do, but I haven't asked many what their stand is on the platforms. When I heard what Sarah Palin has accomplished, I knew that it had to be the LORD working with her in the reformation of the state's party members. There is scripture that backs up the ones who will be the true reformers of their areas of responsibility, and Sarah is a vivid example of that. If she is able to be elected I will certainly be glad to support the reformation of this country and she needs much prayer here as does John McCain. For those who do believe in God, and pray, we need to remember both John and Sarah .

CONSERVATIVES AREN'T
Vocal enough!!! Because our values and principles are honest and strong, we see no need to try and sell ourselves. We have no reason to lie about who we are, hard working, patriotic, freedom loving, family oriented, law abiding, peaceful and generous American citizens. These are the same values and principles our Country was founded on and our Government was established to uphold the integrity of.
So, unless the voice of Conservatism becomes loud and clear, the disguise of liberal socialism will remake America into an entirely different country, one in which conservatives can no longer live. Conservatism cannot live under nor be ruled by socialism, marxism, fascism, communism, totalitarianism, a dictatorship or any regime thereof, and this is what America will become if the liberal left has control over the three branches of our Government. Conservatives will, indeed, need to learn at least one word in Spanish----ADIOS.

HAWKINS CHECK ON GEORGE WILL!!
GEORGE WILL BRAGED ABOUT OBAMA AT THE FIRST DEBATE!??THE LEMMINGS,OR RADICAL DEMO-RATS MAY BE AFTER GEORGE LET US KNOW WHATS UP WITH G.WILL,I HOPE IS IS NOT DRINKING COFFEE OR TEA WITH DAVID GERGEN!OR AL GORE.

What Conservatism Is
Speak softly but carry a big stick...and don't let the flacid, low-life liberals take it away from you:-)

a GREAT video about the crisis
and apropos here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

This youtube takes a few minutes to watch, but it shows really WHY we are in this financial crisis, which was substantially caused by the left/'Crats... I urge you to WATCH IT, PASS IT ALONG, and POST IT ANYWHERE where cognitive people might be interested in understanding the mess.

The video has links and reference sources to build its case. Speaking as a banker of 25 years who was asked to deal for a time with problem assets, I can attest that the banks were effectively compelled to make marginal to poor mortgage loans under the guise of government backing. We all knew that CRA type lending was a ticking time bomb.

The video shows how a flawed social engineering theory resulted in a massive housing bubble, which inexorably had to burst eventually, exposing the fatally flawed lending mistakes engendered by government leftists, first beginning under Jimma' Carter, but made far worse under Slick Willie Clinton.

It was not first and foremost (or even primarily) the marketplace which failed here... it was, once again, social engineering theory and government fiat... but "greed and graft in the marketplace" will wear the collar. This is not, however, to exonerate the thieves packaging mortgages (MBS's) on Wall Street. They are the same morally-bereft, vulture types who were there for the LBO and "dot.com" ripoffs... this time it is MBS's and derivatives.


I will say this-- IF the government bailout does not overprice the "assets," we COULD actually come out whole. We did on the Chrysler bailout, and even when we bailed out Mexico, which paid us back early and at a premium-- probably with some of the oil or drug $ we send them! We even came out surprisingly well on the massive S&L bailout following Reagan's ill-fated and ill-advised deregulation of thrifts (S&L's).

Great article.
This is great. I argue with my stupid "young liberal" friends all the time about these issues and why they buy into the stereotypes about the Right. I'm sharing this with them--maybe it'll make some sense for the confused dudes.

Rules & Observations
Reading this column reminds of some rules to live by and a few observations of truths in life.

"Conservatives don't dislike minorities." - The first one to say racist is the racist.

"Conservatives rig the elections." - A unfair election is one lost by a Liberal.

"Conservatives don't want to pollute the environment." - Environmental whackos, ignorant of nature due to lack of real interaction with it, have done more damage to the environment than a legion of conservative hunters and fishers could ever do. The principle in operation here is: Unintended and undesirable consequences of wellmeaning actions - a Liberal constant.

"Conservatives aren't in the pocket of the rich." - Obama is showing clearly who is in the pockets of the rich - Gollywoodies, Soros, oil-rich Muslims, et al.






DEFINED BY THE LEFT???????
Myk, Location Or

Two Questions:
1. When did you and Hawkins experience your great awakening?

You wrote: "I KNOW a "closet" Socialist when I see one. If you value your liberty, do not vote for ANYONE who wants to INCREASE the centralization of the government, regardless of whether they are of the Marxist variety or the Mussolini-style corporate/statist variety."

2. Why did so many non wealthy, White, go to church christian types vote for Ronald Reagan...TWICE? Why did the same human beings do the same thing for Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.....Twice?

Recommendation: Turn off right wing talking heads, quit being lazy and read ALL sources of "Factual" info. See to it that no man deceive you.

Would you rather have paid two dollars per day in increased taxes per year, ($730) and give back to American families their dead and non wounded "Bush Doctrine" Iraq war victims, and not have Ron Regean and John McCain's deregulated present economic depression or pay an artificially inflated price for a gallon of gasoline and give super wealthy oil execs, Cheney/Bush etc an extra $730 per month in hidden taxes by another name?
Check the Facts. Govmt. Debt and Spending grew more under Reagan and Cheney/Bush than any other admins. in our nation's history. Rhetoric v Reality.

Conservatives should end the stupid Civil war of "us" against "them," which only makes the super wealthy more filthy and more wealthy. Who is lying to us and profiting from mass FEAR? Google a.)Henry Luce and b) Charles Ponzi. "See to it that no man deceive you." JESUS.

Don't Be Defined By The Left

TRUE conservatives do NOT want to increase the centralization and power of the Federal Government.
TRUE conservatives do NOT want a nanny-state. TRUE conservatives believe in INDIVIDUAL liberty AND individual RESPONSIBILITY. TRUE conservatives do NOT expect other people to bail them out when they (the true conservatives) screw up. TRUE conservatives are ADULTS, and act like adults. They do NOT whine to Big Brother for a handout if they have squandered their own resources.
TRUE conservatives do NOT allow themselves to be defined by the crypto-Socialists of the Left. Those on the Left will ALWAYS try to define and CONDEMN the true libertarian principles of free-markets and conservatism BECAUSE of the actions and crimes of false conservatives in the government-subsidized and government-protected corporate oligarchy. DON'T let them get away with that. If THEY succeed in defining YOU, they win.
I am a TRUE conservative, in the classical libertarian sense of the word. George Bush and the RINO'S are NOT. I believe in the value of DECENTRALIZED and LIMITED government. I believe in frugality. I do NOT believe that I have a "Constitutional Right" to someone else's money or property in order to finance my social engineering schemes. I believe in letting other people live their own lives as long as they leave me ALONE.
In my mis-spent youth, I was a Trotskyist. I KNOW a "closet" Socialist when I see one. If you value your liberty, do NOT vote for ANYONE who wants to INCREASE the centralization of the government, regardless of whether they are of the Marxist variety, or the Mussolini-style corporate/statist variety.

edl writes
"Subject: What Conservatism Isn't
How about stating what Conservatism Is?

This conservative prefers order to chaos and courtesy to rudeness.

He likes harmony in music, perspective in paintings and believes with every fiber of his body that 2+2=4.

Oh one more thing, he knows that someone may differ with him and still be an honorable person."

Dear edl: I stopped after reading your comment - the first one I read - because I needed to make a heartfelt response - that your comment went clearly, succinctly and directly to the heart of the matter. I hope to see more of your cogent remarks and hope that more and more get it like you do. Sincere thanks.




What Conservatism Isn't
How about stating what Conservatism Is?

This conservative prefers order to chaos and courtesy to rudeness.

He likes harmony in music, perspective in paintings and believes with every fiber of his body that 2+2=4.

Oh one more thing, he knows that someone may differ with him and still be an honorable person.

In good faith,

E. David Litvak
edl-musings.blogspot.com


Evolution is a Moot Point

The real questions revolve around origins which evolution does not address.

The origin of energy, space, time, and motion will never be proven or solved.

The 'Big Bang' had to have energy, space, motion and materials to 'Bang.

The answer to where energy originated from e.g. is the real question - everything else is mere details.

John Hawkins

John Hawkins this is the best article by you that I have seen.

5 Stars.

Great Article.

VOTE JOHN MCCAIN-
OR WE END UP WITH THE KIM-JUNG ILL-B.HUSSEIN,DUDE!

HAWKINS-YOU NAILED IT!!
THE RADICAL LIBERAL-DEMS JUST AINT HAPPY CAMPERS!THE LIBERALS USE THE SAVE THE PLANET THEME AS A COVER UP,AS A NEW AGE AL GORE TYPE RELIGION!IF THE LORD TOOK US BACK TO THE GARDEN OF EDEN WITH NO SMOG OR POLUTION OF ANY KIND THEY STILL WOULD NOT BE HAPPY THEY LIKE THEIR DARK NESS,AND EVIL VILE WAYS,THEY JUST HIDE BEHIND THEIR NEW AGE RELIGION.

steveL #3 a reply DARWIN- AINT RIGHT!!!
MOST CONSERVATIVES ARE GOD FEARING AND DONT BELIEVE IN THE DARWIN NONSENSE YOU ARE A CORRECT,ON THAT PART.HOW EVER 99.999 OF THE WORLDS SCIENTST KNOW DARWIN IS FULL OF BALONIA,IF YOU LOVE JESUS,AND FORGET ABOUT DARWIN YOU WILL BE FINE,STEVE,DONT JUMP,OFF ANY BUILDINGS YOU GOING TO BE OK!

DVangura
The Catholic church did one positive thing with regard to the advancement of science, it created a class of individuals with the time and resources to investigate such matters.

But otherwise its influence is more of a mixed bag. A lot of good science had to stay in the shadows (Galileo's being the most obvious example) for fear of church reaction. And other important figures had to move to Protestant countries before they felt free to publish.

The aspect of Catholicism that deserves most credit is the development of the humanist movement in people like Erasmus. But over time the humanist movement wound up moving away from the church because it placed too much limitations on their investigations, and their investigations did not always say what the church wanted.

Today the Catholic church has reached a good position with regard to science, namely a view that science should have free range in its own domain, while the church would stick to its own. That is why the catholic church is not bothered by evolution as long as it remains, as it should, a purely scientific theory.

Darwin vs. Creationism
I saw a public opinion poll that revealed that only a small minority of self-described Republicans accept Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.

To 99.999% of the world's scientists, evolution is as true as the atomic theory, or the theory of gravity, or the theory of relativity. To claim it to be false just because you don't like its philosophical implications is a sign of scientific illiteracy.

You may be morally opposed to committing suicide by jumping off of tall buildings, but you can't deny the law of gravity, even though it's gravity that makes such suicides possible.

You may be morally opposed to nuclear war, but the theory of relativity is scientifically true none the same.

Aavenger
is an idiot.
Last time I looked it was the Republican party that has given blacks the highest positions they have ever held in the Government. Oh wait, they don't count as "black" any more since they don't buy into the victim hood status all black must adopt according to the socialist, Marxist Left. Therefore Clearance Thomas, Colin Powell, Condalisa Rice, and the large number of black conservatives that ran in 2006 don't count as "black." The communistic Left would loose every election held if the black community could be freed from the ingnorance the Left keeps them in.

As far as Science, you can thank the Catholic Church and its attitude toward science for the advances and discoveries made throught the history of Western Society. But like all Leftist, you practice the art of redefining history to fit your perverted views and beliefs.

Hawkins lives in La La Land

The anti-science attitudes of the Republicans is beyond dispute. While the overwhelming majority of the scientific community supports evolution and global warming, the Republicans (like Palin and Huckabee) deny the science, and prop up false experts speaking outside their fields of expertise. Why do you think a record 61 Nobel Laureates endorsed Obama?

And on racism, anyone who watched the lily white Republican convention should be laughing their asses off at Hawkins denials of the obvious.

Republicans just SAY they base their views on facts. It's baloney, a con, a big lie. What you really do is base your views on speculation and faith. That is why you are so universally reviled in the scientific community, and why I recently became a former Republican. It has become the party of anti-intellect, and Hawkins little piece of fiction is just one more piece of evidence.

Pasadena Phil
I am not sure what was confusing about my response. You pointed to one particular aspect of the Paulson bill and claimed that it was dangerous and was not being discussed. In fact, while you are right that that passage is dangerous in the power it vests in the Treasury it has already been rejected as part of the bill.

The fact that the bill is more in the form of principles than legislation is a problem, it is just not that problem.

Given that Barney Frank is part of the legislative branch I am not sure why one option would be to go to him. Nor does even Paulson seem to want the government to take over this kind of day to day decision making about loans. What Frank wants is some equity in the companies that are bailed out so that if the venture capitalists recoup their position thanks to the bailout, the costs of the bailouts would be recouped as well.

You are right that in considering the merits of the bill one needs to compare what would happen with what would happen if the bill was not passed or if a different bill was passed. But those comparisons need to actually match up to the bill passing or not passing.

On the otherhand if I had a good idea and Barney Frank was a venture capitalist, he is someone I would want making the decision, since he seems to be a very bright guy. But I doubt that that was why you included Frank in the comparison.

Why Big Business loves Socialism
It was one of those lessons we learned in Business School - barriers to entry. Government involvement was part of every S.W.O.T. analysis of business plans. Big Business tries to get Big Government to muck up the entry point for their markets with extra fees, contract exclusivity, etc. This makes it really hard for smaller businesses with smaller economies of scale to enter the market. This creates an artificial monopoly / oligopoly scenario that benefits big business.

The pay-out from being the exclusive provider of a good or service, by law, can be insane amounts of profit for sub-standard work.

Lon
I'm not sure I understand your point but it's not the oversight that concerns me but the implicit INDEMNIFICATION of past and future crimes. I maintain that THIS is the urgency driving this bill just before the elections. NO ONE is bringing this up, only the oversight considerations. The clause that I saw replacing part of it promises INDEPENDENT review. Very general and does not address the indemnification part.

Also, we don't need a "statement of principles" for a bill. If a bill is required, it needs to be SPECIFIC. The bill as proposed by Paulson is a de facto surrender to centralized government control of most of our economy. Would you rather go to Wall Street venture capitalists for money to fund your new invention or Barney Frank? That is the very essence of why America has been so innovative and why our economy has been so resilient. We are about to legislate that away out of misplace and irrational fear.

Believe me, we can't afford to not take whatever time is necessary to work out a good bill (if one is even necessary). This bill addresses a political urgency, not economic. Otherwise, the DOW would have been down 3000 points Monday or today.

Pasadena Phil
The passage that you have pointed to has probably been the single most discussed part of the Paulson bill. It has been disowned by people on all sides of the debate including Paulson himself who claimed (falsely it would seem) that he just wanted to leave the type of oversight involved to Congress. So while the bill is currently more of a statement of principles, those principles are not consistent with that passage from the Paulson bill.

MikeR
You have hit upon the irony of this column. Hawkins main role as columnist does seem to be promoting a caracature of what liberals believe. So there is a humorous aspect to see him pretend to be offended that there are liberals out there doing the same thing to conservatives.

Hmm
Very interesting. By my count this year, Hawkins wrote 8 columns describing liberals from his conservative point of view; and now he has seen fit to debunk liberals who have done the same. Of course the mutual admiration society can argue that liberals lie while conservatives tell it like it is. The truth, however, is that we are dealing with perception and self honesty. Hawkins acknowledges that some conservative may be flawed, but he lumps all liberals in the same group. Hawkins’ answers to any negative views of conservative are based entirely on his personal perspective on the issue at hand.

This amateurish approach to political commentary serves the egos of many readers, but for all intents and purposes, it’s empty rhetoric. It amazes me that TH would put such a person on the same site as some of the nation’s great conservative ideologists. But Hawkins sells. Maybe that’s TH’s way of saying that money comes before idealism for conservatives.

Where are all the Conservatives?
At least 65% of current congressmen and senators under the Republican label are NOT conservative.
Our President certainly leans more toward liberal than conservative. The bail-outs present and past are a pretty good example of liberal views. Harriet Myers, Amnesty, Meds./Medicare,zero earmark vetoes, and the list goes on. The only conservative actions by the Bush administration were keeping us safe for 7 1/2 years ( a miracle) , tax cuts and his appointments to SCOTUS.
Our country is overtaxed (second highest business taxes in the world) and over-regulated to a point where companies/business are running away and spreading out all over the globe where they can find friendlier environments for their business.

typo
ITYM "Conservatives DON'T rig elections".
Please.

Conservatives Don't...
... directly attack the 1st Amendment and the right to petition, in the name of some nebulous concept of "campaign finance reform." They believe all voices must be heard for the truth to come out.

...uncritically embrace alleged "science" that demands vast expansions of government to the point of totalitarianism, without demanding rigorous proof of its assertions, and that proposed responses will be effective & don't do far more harm than the supposed harm it's to avert. They don't push some particular program of government rationing & control for its own sake regardless of the phenomenon it's supposed to control.

... tolerate lax border security, and the uncontrolled influx of foriegn workers and their families with no intention to truly assimilate, but instead undermine wages & siphon off jobs from young & unskilled Americans while burdening American services & programs, knowing few of these newcomers will become productive full citizens whose allegience is the USA. They will not award citizenship en masse to illegals because they're already here, in the name of "comprehensive immigration reform."

... automatically see government as the solution to social & economic problems, outside of the basic functions of protecting & refereeing our own property & enterprises & dealings w/ each other. Rather, they are automatically skeptical of government, knowing it is run by humans just as fallible.

...pander to their sworn enemies in the government, pop media, academia, & so forth.

...buy into the Marxist notions that one can earn too much or that it is the place of government to decide who should have what. Rather, they will protect private property, free enterprise, & defend one's right to the fruit of ones' labor, valued as indicated by those who voluntarily pay for it.

welcome back, Hawkins
Now, get over your fear and don't vote for Maverick.

One little thing if I may, cons don't consider Dem/libs our bros, they are our domestic enemies. We want to defeat them and their ideas all day every day.

Explain this to me noseholders!
Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

That is an indemnity clause that allows the Treasury Secretary broad undefined powers to grant amnesty for all past and future crimes. Is that still in the bill? Does your congressman know? Why doesn't anyone every bring this up? This bill is more of a political amnesty for criminals bill than an economic bailout bill.

Here is the full original Paulson bill


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21draftcnd.html ?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=business&adxnnlx=1222096048-W1xL7qhEe M0BCEWYpHW6tQ&pagewanted=print

In the Oval Office last night
It was OBAMA who offered the conservative House GOP alternative to the discussion. McCain has dug a deep hole for himself and now finds himself caught in the act of being Bush III while Obama has reached across the aisle to conservatives... the very base McCain relishes in trashing.

This is a defining moment for Republicans. Are you just vapid party loyalists or do you actually believe in conservative principles? Well your congressman is standing up for your interests right now. Help him out. The Paulson bailout is a catastrophic plan. Let's kill and let adults come up with a sensible solution that everyone can sign off on.

Virginia Patriot
It's hopeless. RINOs are just enthralled with the RNC fear-mongering and race-baiting. The only way they will ever release their noses and breath again so the circulation can return to their brains if someone does it for them.

Hawkins rediscovers conservatism?
What next? We have George Will and Craig Shirley back and now Hawkins. Come on you nose holders, let go and take a deep breath. Vote 3rd party in November. These are the guys your congressman is fighting. Help him/her out! Conservatives are winning so join us.

Virginia Patriot
As our "favorite" president liked to say, "I feel your pain." I too have a hard time voting for the RINO's like McCain. However, the alternative is so dangerous I don't think I really have a choice. As long as I live in a close state like Ohio, I think I have to vote for the lesser of two evils. If I move to a state that is obviously one way or the other, I'll probably vote my conscience and go with a third party.

Great Column!
Conservative IS NOT the same as Republican, see John McCain. I will vote for conservatives, I will no longer vote for non-conservative Republicans.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.