The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Not everyone here subscribes to my conspiratorial theory - in fact, just the opposite, really.

Really? They should recognize that even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Really? They should recognize that even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut.

I am offended because if I were a liberal, this blind squirrel talk would not be tolerated. hmph!

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I am offended because if I were a liberal, this blind squirrel talk would not be tolerated. hmph!

If you were liberal, the squirrel would have better health care and perhaps not be blind.

[flippyshark]

That's it! Thanks! (I love that this is such a smart place.)

[scaeagles]

Damn conservatives dumping chemicals into the environment caused a genetic defect in the poor squirrel, I'm sure.

[innerSpaceman]

Sometime scaeagles, and I'm being entirely serious here, I'd like it if you'd remind me why exactly it is you are a Conservative, and what Conservative principles appeal to you personally.


For instance, is it not a Conservative principle that markets should be as free as possible, with little or no regulation? And yet won't free markets take whatever shortcuts are necessary, including poisoning the environment affecting everyone (shareholders and squirrels included), with little or no regulation?

Do Conservatives support checks and balances on corporate and business activity? On government activity? Do you support such things?


With all the generalizations being bandied about, I'm genuinely confused.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Sometime scaeagles, and I'm being entirely serious here, I'd like it if you'd remind me why exactly it is you are a Conservative, and what Conservative principles appeal to you personally.

Why I am a conservative - a short essay by Leo Scaeagles, at the Request of Steve InnerSpaceMan

To begin, let me state that I do not currently equate being a republican with being a conservative. The last two republican Presidents have not resembled anything close to conservatism. The Republican congress which was swept into power in 1994 had the potential, but failed mightily. However, I do believe that the republicans are closer to what I am than the democrats, but perhaps I am closer to being a libertarian than either. I’ve stated before why I am not officially a libertarian nor do I vote libertarian as a rule. I don’t think I’ve ever voted for one, but that’s a different issue. Please understand that much of what I will be stating is matter of (what I consider to be an educated) opinion, but I will not be prefacing each statement with “I believe”.

I am first and foremost a strict constructionist in regards to the Constitution. The Constitution was never meant to be a “living, breathing” document. If that were the case, it really means nothing. The Constitution has an amendment process through which it can be changed and has been many times in ways that have indeed improved it. I have found conservatives to be much more in line with the original thinking of the writers as expanded upon in the Federalist Papers.

I believe in small government, loving the phrase “that government is best that governs least”. In that way, I am much more libertarian than conservative, particularly on social issues. I completely understand that there is a certain amount of government oversight and regulation to ensure an even playing field. I hesitate to use that phrase because it can have a varied meaning to different people. Even playing field means that I have the can have the same opportunities to achieve success as you do. It is not the job of the government, though, to ensure that everyone has the same social conditions to ensure those opportunities, and admittedly it can be difficult to do so. It is the responsibility of the individual to figure out how to get access to them. While case after case can be cited of those who have struggled to find them, case after case can be cited of those who found them in spite of difficult circumstances.

I also understand, to directly address a question from ISM, that it is in the best interests of the people and government to regulate (to an extent) the businesses and corporations that have an impact on the environment and the business world in general. Here is where I get fuzzy in that I don’t think there is a line one can draw to define how far it should go or what it should entail. This is why there is so much debate about what should be done and how much should be done. I admittedly don’t have a formula, and since what is common sense to one isn’t common sense to another, there will always be the need for debate. Of course there isn’t much debate that toxic chemicals shouldn’t be dumped into the ocean and there should be regulations and punishment for violators. The differences come into play (granted, an extreme example) on whether a farmer who kills an endangered field mouse with his tractor should lose his farm because of legal action taken against him. I lean toward limiting regulation, but that requires responsibility on the part of corporations that don’t always have it. Those that don’t make it very hard on those that do.

The government takes too much of the money of the populace. They are wasteful, inefficient, top heavy, and politically motivated. I have no doubt I can make better decisions with my money than they can. I recognize the valuable functions that taxation provides in terms of infrastructure and national defense, but they don’t limit themselves to such functions. Corporate taxes do nothing to corporations. They are taxes passed along to consumers in the form of increased prices. Taxation of income is a taxation on the accumulation of wealth. I believe the founders had it right with property taxes being just about it.

The federal government has taken over the functions of the state government and uses extortion to get the states to do what the feds want them to. I am a huge states rights person and want the feds to keep their hands out of what should be the rights of states to do business in the way they see fit. Interstate commerce has been twisted by the feds and the judicial branch to a point where states have virtually no rights any longer.
I hesitate to delve further into specifics (and in fact have started many times to do so), so to summarize, it comes down to my view of the Constitution, the amount of spending and size and influence of our government, view on the sovereignty of our borders, and states rights.

That is the very short version of why I am a conservative. There are many things I have not addressed that come into play as well.

[scaeagles]

I will respond to this, ISM....just might take a little longer than I can do at work.

It's also my youngest's 7th birthday today! So I'm not sure if it will be this evening either.

Please remind me if this gets lost somewhere.

[innerSpaceman]

Sure. And Happy Birthday to your youngest! BTW, age 7 is when personality becomes completely fixed and you as a parent cease having any influence. Your job is done! (Well, except for the money that will continue to flow for 20 more years.)

[scaeagles]

If that's the case, my 7 year old is going to be a great person because her personality ROCKS! Unofficially the most fun of my children.