Thursday, November 06, 2008

Are Republicans real conservatives?

Spread the wealth around?

Is the graduated income tax (first proposed by Adam Smith) socialism? If you really think that "spreading the wealth around" is always and everywhere a bad thing, then shouldn't there be a flat tax?

And what about the $700 billion bailout? How can Republicans attack socialism if they participated in the bailout? Spread the wealth around? Isn't that what the Bush administration initiated, and McCain voted for?

From each according to his abilities, so long as you are in the middle class. To each according to his needs, if you are a big enough corporation.

When it comes to actual governance, the "conservatism" of Barry Goldwater is gone. What you get is corporate prostitution. Republicans follow conservative principles when it serves the interests of "the haves and the have mores." They trash those principles when it becomes convenient for the big companies.

I realize that my tone is a little cynical here. Perhaps someone can explain what the Republican Party today has to do with real conservatism.

And please don't tell me that at least this fake conservatism is better than liberalism. I just want to know what real conservative principles are, and how well you think the Republican party of George W. Bush reflects those principles.

11 comments:

Jim Jordan said...

The Republican party of George W. Bush is finished, and, no, it wasn't truly conservative, not even close. The bail-out is a bizarre form of socialism, a contrived war is an Orwellian concept, and out-of-control spending is the most insidious type of taxation. History has shown that doing a bad job has no cure. In a democracy, you're handing your sceptre to the opposition.

Btw, There are five newly elected pro-life Democrats in Congress, to go with the other dozen or so.

Blue Devil Knight said...

The Republicans lately have been for unregulated capitalism when it comes to corporate profits, socialism when it comes to corporate losses. It's just not consistent. That doesn't mean it's bad (politics is a weird animal), but it is strange to hear them acting so principled when they are not being consistent.

At any rate, I'm just gonna enjoy the next few months thinking about what is going to happen January 20. See you at the Inauguration!

Ron said...

The GOP has not been fiscally conservative by any stretch of imagination since Bush was first elected. It's shocking to me that the Democrats are now actually more fiscally conservative. Tax-and-spend is frankly fiscally better than borrow-and-spend. Ideally, true conservatism would be to both tax and spend less. Unfortunately, under 'compassionate conservatism,' we ultimately got quasi-nationalization of the banks.

I've threatened to register as an independent over this but one of my friends rightly pointed out that the Republicans would become worse ('a corporate welfare party') if Christians abandoned it. So I am sticking around, though primarily just because they are a million times better on the abortion issue than the Democrats.

If I weren't a Christian, I'd drop the GOP in a heartbeat at this point.

Gordon Knight said...

The real tradedy is that Bush and the Repubs were fiscally reckless is good times, when ballancing the budget (see Clinton, Bill) could easily have been done.

Now we cannot worry about deficits. Gov't spending is not optional, its a necessity because of the Economic situation.

When the economy tanks, borrow and spend is a GOOD idea. It's like a war, you do what you can to fix the economy and worry about paying for it later.

Unfortunately the policies of the last eight years make the later cost much worse than they otherwise would be.

Ron: I have never understood the implicatino relation between being a Christian and being a Republican.

The Family said...

A traditional American conservative wants government to manage crime (protect citizens and arrest and punish criminals) and defend the country against foreign aggression, but as much as possible not interfere with people otherwise. By that definition nobody in the current Congress is a traditional conservative, I suppose.

Bert Power said...

Dick Armey, a creator of the original conservative movement, agrees with you and says the party had best get back to being conservative:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122602742263407769.html

Blue Devil Knight said...

I miss Ilion.

Ilíon said...

Ilíon is getting quite bored with dealing with irrationality and illogic and out-right intellectual dishonesty.

Ilíon said...

This thread seems about the best place to put these items:

A little something from the middle of October, an idea for "spreading the wealth:" House Democrats Contemplate Abolishing 401(k) Tax Breaks

And, some Fascism soon to come our way, straight from the Fascist-elect

Victor Reppert said...

Perhaps the Democratic victory will give conservatives the opportunity to define conservatism, as opposed to defending the party which claims to be conservative. If you listen to some people on the Left talk about Clinton you will find that he is considered a sellout, and some of the same arguments could be made concerning Bush.

Something happens to conservatism when it gets connected with political power, and perhaps something happens to liberalism as well. As a result I have trouble figuring out whether I am a real liberal or just someone completely fed up with governance in the name of conservatism. I think I hold beliefs about economic luck which keep me out of the conservative camp. But I just hate corporate prostitution.

Ilíon said...

Here is a newer report on the coming Democratic debacle on 401(k) and IRA accounts:

Carolina Journal Online: Dems Target Private Retirement Accounts Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs
"RALEIGH — Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration. ..."

According to this report, the Dems aren't talking merely about eliminating the "tax break" of 401(k) and IRA accounts -- which is to say, taxing you twice on the same income -- but are *already* actively talking about confiscation of your wealth. For your own good, of course!

You "wicked" "rich" person, you!

When will you ever learn, Mr and Mrs America? If you refuse to grasp the inherent rank immorality of all socialistic schemes, will you not finally at least look to your own self-interest? The Democrats have never been your friend, and for many years they have been your active enemy.