Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

What is the matter with you? If you want to have an adult conversation have one, make statements based on the facts at hand and not the personalities of those involved in the conversation.... You offer us nothing to consider other than the fact that you are ill equipped to have a serious conversation about complex issues so there for you resort to attacking those with whom your disagree...

silver Loc: Santa Monica Ca.

I only have one thing to say here. Richard Nixon.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Wow Really! Even your esteemed Krugman admitted as much in the GPS interview I linked for you a few days back, go back to where he introduces his idea of preparing for the country for a space invasion, Krugman admits that FDR's policies had done very little to improve the economy that it was the mobilization for war that made the difference, Krugman also tends to play down the fact that the real recovery came after the war when the industrial economies of Europe and Asia lay in ashes....

dljen Loc: Central PA

I know what he was saying and it still doesn't make sense to me.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

Well, yes. If they are required (forced) to teach for less pay than they would be willing to teach for otherwise, or under degrading conditions, etc., then they are being enslaved to that extent. It seems that you have the wits to make the generalization, but not the wits to understand why it's not ridiculous.

The point is that a moral transaction involves 2 or more parties exchanging goods, services and money (which is basically a token for the other two things) without anyone being coerced. (Any time a government or other similar group of brigands intervenes, somebody is getting coerced. Most likely, everybody legitimately involved in the transaction is. Of course, you wouldn't care about that so long as you get your cut of the proceeds of the robbery, would you?

oldintn

Many fail to look at the historical facts. In 1860 the Dem party were the conservatives, the GOP a bunch of raving liberals. They changes roles slowly until about WWII, but the southern wing of the Dems remained conservative until the 60's, then they became the southern GOP. Party names did not change, merely their platforms. Ike today would be labeled a screaming liberal and old RR would be a leftist moderate. Any examination of their efforts and accomplishments compared to the liberal/conservative agenda clearly shows their progressive view of government. So, the only real conservative accomplishment is opposition to progress.

RDH

All true. But remember that for a true Conservative ignorance is bliss. For that reason you will never persuade them. But keep trying, it is the good fight.

ceallachain Loc: Cape May, NJ

Ahh yes the factual Conservative throwing facts around that sound believable but are really half-truths. Lets check them out:
Yes, Lincoln was a Republican. But, his Republican party of yesterday is now the Democratic party of today. And has been since the late nineteen teens ~~1917 or so.

Your spiel on Ike is again half-truth. Ike was a moderate Republican more then willing to spend billions to better open the country to support economic and transportation needs. There was nothing Conservative about him he put the needs of the country ahead of party/ideology.

Again, on Ike, yes he is responsible for NASA. This was in response to Sputnik. And, again he spent billions all because America needed to beat the Russians. Which of course we did because of a futuristic looking Kennedy who was also thinking about beating the Russians. Both Ike and JFK were not just thinking in the realm of Space Exploration but militarily as well. Therefore the spending of billions without the blinking of an eye. Nothing too conservative going on for either of them. Oh yes, NASA was supposed to be a non-military venture. Take a look at its original charter. Today, it’s involved in all kinds of military ventures.

WWII. Again you’re half right. It wasn’t just the war itself that got us out of the depression. It was more the aftermath. The Marshal Plan saving Eastern Europe (Greece, Turkey.) The GI Bill providing for the education and home for veterans and their families. Again nothing conservative about the billions spent in either of those ventures.

And, finally the Voting Rights and Civil Rights legislation. The need to reach across the aisle, i.e., compromise, has to do with the southern dixiecrats, e.g. Strom Thurmond and other diehard conservatives of their day. The legislation passed with the help of the more moderate thinking Republican of that time. Those who were putting their country before their party/ideology/region.

The problem with all conservative spiels is that it's always half-truths and thus believable by the very gullible. So sad they can't think United States of America first!

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Why guess? He's on top a few months back saying he cannot, by law, fix immigration and that it must be performed through Congress. Apparently the Constitution has changed this summer?

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

Sounds like you think that "progress", i.e., change for its own sake is a good thing.

The problem with "progressives" is that you believe that just because some idea or way of doing things is new, it's automatically better than whatever it would replace. The problem with conservatives is their categorical presumption that an old idea is better, just for being old.
Personally, I believe that the conservatives, in most cases are somewhat more likely to be right for the simple reason that the ideas and practices they seek to conserve are, at least, well tested. (Those that fail to adapt tend to be the ones that conservatives, themselves, stop trying to conserve.) A new "progressive" idea is inherently untested, at least until somebody tries it out. We don't (and can't) know all of the effects of implementing one. Ever heard the term "unintended consequences"?

And, of course, there's less-than-enlightened self interest clouding judgment and motives on both sides.

Often, "progressives" want change mainly because someone else is running things and the progs want (badly enough to kill for) the chance to run things for their own advantage. Do you really think the Lenins, Hitlers and Castros of the world were/are in it for any reason other than their own self-aggrandizement?

And there are a few conservatives who would hang onto nasty old practices because they've been the beneficiaries of those practices. Do you think the Klansmen and "Dixiecrats" were doing what they did for any reason other than that they wanted (badly enough to kill for) to have someone they could feel superior to?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I see, so to be considered conservative you it is required that you have no vision of better tomorrow for your country, you would do no work to strengthen our country, the only trait that according to you would qualify you as a conservative would be putting your own personal gain ahead of your country.... Are you really this vain? As you go down your list your response is filled of the same delusional evaluation.

What is sad about liberals such as yourself, you actually believe the stuff you write.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

If they didn't, they wouldn't be liberals. Ever notice that people over on the left need to re-label themselves every so often? Could it be because they don't have the brains to not repeatedly foul their own nests.

pjferrante Loc: California and Missouri

I learned that there's no point in trying to reason with people who know everything. But it's gratifying to see a few (very few) honest and intelligent posts and replies.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

The problem with liberal spiels is that it's always full of revisionist, self serving dogma so they can lay claim to Republican presidents.......again, because all of theirs have sucked.

dljen Loc: Central PA

Is it necessary to post this? Nobody has to post every single thing they think. I wish we could come together as friends, not always debating politics, religion, guns, etc.