Ed's quotes are italicized...
Bush is certainly conservative when compared to his predecessor but maybe not when compared to Jessie Helms et al...
Actually, no. Bush has far outspent Clinton on social programs and other discretionary spending.
Clinton was also far more conservative with his use of the Military and clearly in his respect for and disinterest in tinkering with the U.S. Constitution.
What you guys failed to realize in your Clinton Hating zeal, was that Clinton was likely the best Republican President you've ever had! If you want a big, intrustive Federal Government (the opposite of Conservatism) apparently Bush is your man!
My politics do not run strictly along party lines much like yours don't. I do support the death penalty but I am starting to believe it is overused.
Glad to hear it. Though a true conservative, who saw that a law was either being "overused" or rather unequally and unjustly applied would be against such a law for those reasons alone! Not to mention that Killing of Citizens at the Federal Level of Government in and of itself would be contrary to the Conservative values (real ones, not the "political" ones, the ones espoused by Bush and your compadre Paul here for instance) of less Government (especially Federal!) intrusion.
I do not support abortion as you and I have discussed this in the past. I support the decision to be in Iraq and am disappointed it has not gone more smoothly. I am not sure what I expected but not the mess we are in now.
Again. That war was NOT a "conservative" one by any measure! As to what you had expected, and the mess we are in now, all I can say is that had Bush listened to *real* Conservatives before plowing ahead no matter what, he would have heard all the warnings NOT to go in. From folks like Pat Buchanan (a real Conservative) and his father (not as Conservative, of course, but has a bit of experience in the area which the Son ignored all together). Bush the Elected said in his memoirs, which I'm guessing the Son didn't read:
"Trying to eliminate Saddam ... would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. ... [T]here was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."
You can read more about it via this article at Paul's only news source NewsMax (of all places!)
My break with the right comes mainly in issues such as right to die. Most true conservatives are appalled at people like Dr Kevorkian but I am not. Life is precious but if a terminally ill person wants to end it all I don't have a problem with it.
Which demonstrates your confusion. It is YOU that is the "true conservative" on that one. A true conservative would think it's none of the Government's goddamn business if someone would like to take their own life.
It's the Fake Conservatives who are --- seemingly --- all about more such government intrusion into people's lives. I'm with you, and the *real* Conservatives on that one!
Not sure how I feel about stem cell research. I don't support Democrats because I don't want the government doing everything for me and raising my taxes.
Again, True Conservatives would not BAN the research on stem cells. And while nobody cares for raising taxes, a True Conservative would recognize the need for Fiscal Responsibility. Since clearly neither party enjoys cutting programs and entitlements, the only other choice for Fiscal Responsibility would be raising taxes. It *certainly* wouldn't be to cut taxes during a time of war! Which is unheard of!
Democrats also have become so inclusive of every wacko faction out there that they just don't represent my interests anymore. (Gay rights & marriages being an example).
Once again, I hate to suggest confusion there, but both of those things would again be rather Conservative values. If Gays want to get married, what business is that of Government?
It seems to me like the Republican Party has done a fine job of messin' with their constituents heads, so they don't know which way is up, down, Conservative or Liberal anymore. Which I'm fairly sure was their aim! Our friend Paul and his twisted opinions (based on political expediency more than any particular true politcal philosophy) is the perfect example. The target audience. And the only hope for the GOP at this point. If they can sucker enough folks like him, they can move ahead. But they've reached a tipping point, clearly, when folks like yourself are saying "what the heck is going on here?!"
As to the "wacko's", I'd suggest they're everywhere. We've only got two parties, sadly, so the whacko's end up in one of the two parties available to them. If you don't see said "whackos" in the GOP, then I guess you're not really looking. I'll be happy to point them out if you don't know where to look.
I have yet to have any of my rights trampled on as a result of the Patriot Act and having dealt with Homeland security through work have found them much easier to deal with than the Border Patrol.
YOU may not have had such rights trampled. But then again, YOU probably wouldn't have any rights trampled if Slavery was re-establilshed either. The True Conservatives, like Buchanan and Barr, are at least intellectually honest enough to realize the paril to our Constitution in bills like the Patriot Act. It has nothing to do with YOU'RE rights personally, or who is "easiest" to "deal with". (The Homeland Security Dept, btw, exists independently of the Patriot Act, so liking them and disliking Border Patrol doesn't really have much of anything to do with the Patrioit Act).
I don't believe Bush had any prior knowledge of 9/11 as it has been suggested on this blog
By a Commentor, not by me. Though it's arguable that he certainly *should* have had more knowledge than he did, since his own FBI, his own Terrorism Czar and the Commission on Terrorism (lead by Rudman and Hart) was trying to tell him! And in fact, on Sept 5th, issued their report saying that "thousands of Americans would die".
Bush was playing clearing brush in Crawford at the time, of course.
I don't believe all Democrats are commies nor do I believe all Republicans are fascists.
Good. Neither do any reasonable folks.
I will give the devil his due in saying some the most intelligent people I know are devout leftists and that would include you. I just don't happen to agree with you politically in most cases but it does not make either one us an idiot.
Agreed. Which is why we enjoy your comments here! If the rest of the world is gonna go crazy, perhaps we can find some common ground here. I think you're a more Liberal than you think you are, and more Conservative than the GOP would like you to believe at the same time.
I believe that *you* are intelligent enough to recognize those distinctions.
That being said Snoqualmie is 30 miles due east of Seattle and if you have any good pictures I would not be offended if you email them when you have a chance.
Haven't been there yet specifically. But if we do get over there, I'll see what I can get for ya! If it's anywhere near as gorgeous as the places we've been, it should be a great trip!!!
Apparently we do agree on equal rights for women so be sure and give Des her freedom by making her build the fire.
Are you kidding? She's the Fire Master!!!