DCCC Takes On Fox News

[The Village Idiot]

The State of Texas and other states have free online K-12 schools. These are real public schools but online. They even have "field trips". They'll even pay for the PC and help pay for the internet access, and its still a bargain for the taxpayers. This is only for people who are able to have an adult watching over them and helping them of course, In POOR communities I could easily see a series of small community "schools" hooking up this way with a few local mothers being hired at a not inflated wage to help the kids and watch over them.

[BEG]

Damn it, man! Do you get what you just did? You listened to me tell you that most American people are, at heart, good people, and you countered by telling me all liberals are evil.

Do you believe every person in this country who voted for Barack Obama was evil? An evil person? Do you believe over half of the American people are evil? Do you believe roughly half of the country, give or take, are authoritarian evil-doers who need to be exterminated? Because if all people on the left are as evil as you paint them to be, if there is nothing between 'liberal' and 'conservative' and no room for reason, then you might as well start the killing now.

You have a lot of people to go through.

All of the people in my life who voted for Obama are good people except for perhaps my brother and I kind of have to love him so he doesn't count.  I have a total moonbat for a friend back in Dallas who is the typical moonbat that comes packaged with a ton of mental health issues but she tries and I know how difficult life is for her so I over look a lot.  She is probably the most well read and informed of all of my moonbat friends.  She even had a copy of Atlas Shrugged on her bookcase but then she also had a Jimmy Carter book too so I'm not going to give her credit for the Atlas Shrugged.  One time my daughter was in the car with her and her two daughters.  Durring the 2008 campaign they were behind a carpenters truck, the truck had a McCain sticker on it.  She said that now she knows which carpenter NOT to use.  HA HA  She knows my political views and knew my child was aware of my views (and has a few views of her own).  When her kids would get in my car I always turned off talk radio because I didn't want to make her kids uncomfortable.  Same thing with the news, when my daughters have friends over I turn the channel to something non-political.  My daughter still brings the "carpenter incident" up frequently.  In fact she said something about it yesterday.  She said it made her feel like she didn't belong, like she wasn't wanted around.  

Even with that I still like my moonbat friend, she has pulled a lot of shit and hurt quite a few people but at the end of the day, she really means well.    

[The Village Idiot]

By the way I am independent.

I even tried to start a blog, a tongue-n-cheek "revolutionary" blog. I just posted on it for the first time since September.

I just posted the "I think" post from above.

http://unitedcitizen.blogspot.com/

[Doppelganger]

The State of Texas and other states have free online K-12 schools. These are real public schools but online. They even have "field trips". They'll even pay for the PC and help pay for the internet access, and its still a bargain for the taxpayers. This is only for people who are able to have an adult watching over them and helping them of course, In POOR communities I could easily see a series of small community "schools" hooking up this way with a few local mothers being hired at a not inflated wage to help the kids and watch over them.

That's a pretty awesome idea, actually, and is exactly the sort of realistic and fiscally intelligent thinking I'd like to see out of government, as long as it was handled well. Do you trust either major party to handle a transition from our current school system to a system like that without royally FUBARing it?

Even with that I still like my moonbat friend, she has pulled a lot of shit and hurt quite a few people but at the end of the day, she really means well.  

Yes, a lot of the time, it's good people who are attracted to politicians who talk the prettiest talk but don't follow through in their actions. This can happen on both sides of the aisle, but I think the left is especially vulnerable because the left tends to be more concerned with idealism than the right.

[The Village Idiot]

That's a pretty awesome idea, actually, and is exactly the sort of realistic and fiscally intelligent thinking I'd like to see out of government, as long as it was handled well. Do you trust either major party to handle a transition from our current school system to a system like that without royally FUBARing it?

No of course not. They would regulate them until they were the same as the failed public schools.

[Doppelganger]

No of course not. They would regulate them until they were the same as the failed public schools.

Yup.

By the way I am independent.

Then perhaps you would be interested in trying to start some kind of movement to wake people the hell up. I don't care if it's called Centrist, Americanist, AverageJoeist, who cares. I know the Tea Party movement has already been started in this vein, but people on both sides need to be woken up and reminded that their fellow Americans are not the evil they need to watch out for. The Tea Party movement's problem is that it is almost purely conservative, because conservatives have been quicker to wake up to the facts, but the other half of our nation cannot be left behind. Good, average Americans who believe in essential rights and reducing the power of government in our lives need to group together and do something.

[The Village Idiot]

Quote
I think all welfare programs should be consolidated into one monthly cash payment not large enough to be comfortable on.

A damned good idea, though difficult to put into practice. We need to trim a lot of unnecessary spending at a time like this.

Do you realize how many massive bureaucracies there are just to deliver a tenth or possibly a quarter of the money budgeted for a welfare program to those who need it, and then the US is awful at making sure those signing up actually need it? If we could cut the overhead by half, which I think we could easily, we could save the taxpayers a huge bundle while helping out the real poor MORE than we do now.

I say all those bureaucrats should go bye bye. We should have a single bureaucracy devoted to it, they should even be able to visit homes of those getting it to make sure they were telling the truth and even be able to find poor people who didn't sign up, even take referrals from churches & apartment managers. Remember the old movies where the social workers actually walked the blocks, where they might even be from a church instead of a government employee? Beats the big impersonal monsster we have now.

[The Village Idiot]

Yup.

Then perhaps you would be interested in trying to start some kind of movement to wake people the hell up. I don't care if it's called Centrist, Americanist, AverageJoeist, who cares. I know the Tea Party movement has already been started in this vein, but people on both sides need to be woken up and reminded that their fellow Americans are not the evil they need to watch out for. The Tea Party movement's problem is that it is largely conservative, because conservatives have been quicker to wake up to the facts, but the other half of our nation cannot be left behind. Good, average Americans who believe in essential rights and reducing the power of government in our lives need to group together and do something.

If the movement stuck to what I wrote in that 'I think' post, I think they could be pretty successful.

[The Village Idiot]

I think government needs to stop propping up failed businesses. AMTRAK, GM etc
I think government needs to stop funding private entities like Planned Parenthood or ACORN or charities.
I think government needs to stop putting up entry barriers to force less competition or control markets and end all forms of corporate and agricultural subsidies/quotas/licenses.
I think all welfare programs should be consolidated into one monthly cash payment not large enough to be comfortable on.
I think government needs to stop bestowing benefits to non-citizens who came here illegally.
I think the government needs to get out of the banking, home loan and student loan business.
I think federal government needs to get out of the school business.
I think government should not own land it does not need for a legitimate governing reason. Like a court house.
I think government has no business operating or funding TV channels, radio networks, art or anything else.

lol. consolidated to 9 lines.

[Doppelganger]

Those are all good, though I would add:

The government needs reform from special interest groups and corporations, and that reform has to come from somewhere that isn't already compromised.
and
The government needs to start enforcing our rights, not our entitlements.

I think a lot of people want this kind of reform, even people on the liberal side of the aisle (even if they've been fooled into believing otherwise). Part of the reason I used to believe I was liberal was because, as I mentioned before, liberal and conservative America tend to portray one another as evil. Once you're on one side, it's rare that you actually examine the motivations behind those who identify with the other. Once I did, I found conservatism more practical in many ways, but I cannot imagine all of the liberal people I know were simply 'evil' or had bad intentions.

And this is an ideal time for government reform. In fact, I bet we won't get another opportunity like this within the next several decades. Certainly it's the first of its kind for a long while.

But I need to crash out for the night. Thanks for the good debate.  

[The Village Idiot]

If government stopped propping up and doing favors for business, the corporations would have nothing to do in DC.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitler.htm

Any extremism carried out to its logical ends is scary. Hitler was more conservative than liberal...

The **** he was.

Conservatives don't agree with the mixing of government and corporations, centralized power, government services, disarming the people or eugenics. Those are strictly leftist agendas.

Get your facts straight, boy.

[dandi]

Well, now, would you look at that!  Hitler was just slightly right of center.

Now, who was it on this thread that was saying that a centrist to slightly right of center 3rd party needs to emerge?

[dandi]

My apologies. I'm new here and I haven't exactly memorized the roster yet.

Not a problem, just throwing it out there.

Oh, yeah. McCain is proof positive that the primary process works just dandy.

It isn't perfect, but it wasn't from lack of trying to defeat Captain Amnesty.  I may not have liked the outcome, but the process did it's part.

Oh, sorry. Here.
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/01/27/sarah-palins-latest-disaster-tea-partiers-demand-refunds-for-palin-speech/
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/palin-tea-party-speech-netting-her-100000/question-812261/

You went from citing the huffpo to alternet?!? 

 

What's next?  Daily Kos?  Democratunderground?

Do you have anything other than flaming leftist sites to make your point?

Not really. The people were presented with two lousy gubernatorial choices. They picked the less lousy of the two.

Can't speak for NJ, but are you seriously calling Bob McDonnell a lousy choice?

What, would you prefer TJ?  

Touche, sir, and well played.

 

Seriously, though, I never said he was. He sure as hell was centrist compared to some of the people here, though.

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson

Care to try that centrist bullshit again?

You need to stop and consider what you're saying.

My thoughts and conclusions come from true history and what I see happening to my country.  But I thank you for your input and will take it under advisement.   

And do you honestly, honestly believe the Democratic politicians are the only ones lying to you?

Nope.

You think the Republican power-brokers aren't doing the same exact thing?

Yep, quite a few of them are just as bad.

And do you think that these Democrats you are so willing to label as evil will not be just as effective as you at riling up extremists and going to war?

Ummmm, where have you been?  They've been doing that for damn near 40 years. 

Think for a moment before you take that fatal step.

Fatal step?  Drama much?

Religion in politics, the persecution of homosexuals, racism... here's what the Democrats are saying conservatives will do with power, buddy.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.  Like I didn't know this already?

And Republicans are just as bad. Any liberal officeholder is a Marxist, communist, atheist bastard.

The republicans don't have the balls to say anything like that.  Which is why I'm not a Republican.

Looks like you bought in hook, line, and sinker.

Sorry, sugar pants, I don't need to be told by anyone that the present day democrat party is a detriment to our freedom and liberty and they want to rule our lives while they get to live like kings.

I don't particularly care whether it's a Democrat or Republican being seated or unseated. Both represent the same problem and ongoing animosity.

Which is why a relative unknown, articulating common sense basic conservatism, dislodged a senate seat that had been occupied by a liberal cretin for over 40 years.

Pay attention to the primary season this year, you might see something new and exciting.

Yes, the Democrats are going to see a big backswing soon, and yes, Republicans will gloat and abuse power just as badly, and probably try exactly the same steamrolling tactics that the Dems have for the past year. I'm supposed to be impressed?

Steamrolling the socialist bullshit backwards is what I'm interested in.  If the republicans can't do that, then they will be sent back to the minority, as they were in 06.  Whether you're impressed or not is irrelevant.

If you can manage to do that, I'll cheer you on.

NJ, VA, MA, no democrat seat safe.  It seems that it's happening but somehow or another you are missing it.

In the meantime I'll try to keep people who buy into political ideologies like schmucks from killing one another or turning our state into a totalitarian circus.

 

 

There is no dealing with liberals.  They have proven it over, and over, and over ad infinitum.  When it gets to the point that you cannot deal reasonably with another party, the only other answer is to defeat them.  The way that happens is drawing a distinct difference between yourself and them, articulate your position, and win people over.

[dandi]

No,  Hitler was not leftist - his social ideals were primarily conservative.

Feel free to drop the centrist conservative charade at any time.  That is a standard talking point of a leftist.

[DumbAss Tanker]

The Left and the Right keep trying to gift each other Hitler, he really doesn't fit either one in classic terms and it's basically a pointless exercise.  He had a bunch of Left-wing social programs, but he was all about social conservative values at least as far as the Herrenvolk were concerned (At the expense of all the non-Herrenvolk).  Whatever kind of social organization he had in mind was distorted by the war and the need to allocate short resources, which every other country including us did as well. 

If you have to classify him as anything for 'No-he's-YOURS' purposes, I'd say he was the ultimate anti-Libertarian...and Libertarians aren't necessarily either Left or Right. 

[dandi]

but he was all about social conservative values at least as far as the Herrenvolk were concerned (At the expense of all the non-Herrenvolk). 

Such as?

[Doppelganger]

The **** he was.

Conservatives don't agree with the mixing of government and corporations, centralized power, government services, disarming the people or eugenics. Those are strictly leftist agendas.

Get your facts straight, boy.

No, those are authoritarian agendas.

Get your facts straight, boy.

libâ‹…erâ‹…al  [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl]  Show IPA
Use liberal in a Sentence
–adjective
1.   favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2.   (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3.   of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4.   favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5.   favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6.   of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7.   free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8.   open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.

conâ‹…servâ‹…aâ‹…tive  [kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv]  Show IPA
–adjective
1.   disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
2.   cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.
3.   traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.
4.   (often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.
5.   (initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism.
6.   having the power or tendency to conserve; preservative.
7.   Mathematics. (of a vector or vector function) having curl equal to zero; irrotational; lamellar.
–noun
8.   a person who is conservative in principles, actions, habits, etc.
9.   a supporter of conservative political policies.

au⋅thor⋅i⋅tar⋅i⋅an  [uh-thawr-i-tair-ee-uhn, uh-thor-] Show IPA
Use authoritarian in a Sentence
–adjective
1.   favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed to individual freedom: authoritarian principles; authoritarian attitudes.
2.   of or pertaining to a governmental or political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people.
3.   exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of another or of others: an authoritarian parent.

Do you care to debate the dictionary? Or are the standard definitions of liberal, conservative, and authoritarian all incorrect?

[Doppelganger]

You went from citing the huffpo to alternet?!?  

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100114/NEWS01/1140332/Palin-to-allow-media-to-cover-Tea-Party-speech
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/11/palin-to-headline-tea-party-convention.html

I can keep finding more sources if you'd like - my only point was the $500+ cost to attend and Palin's nice little paycheck. Even conservative sources won't dispute that.

Strike that: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/No_fee.html?showall

So, I'll give you that it looks like Palin did it for free but was offered the $100k, for which I applaud her.

The organizer of the event, however, is still raking in the dough. Not so grassroots, eh?

Can't speak for NJ, but are you seriously calling Bob McDonnell a lousy choice?

No, I was talking about the MA election, not VA.

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

"The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object."

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."

And, most importantly...

"If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it."

Our house is on fire. Stop worrying about blaming each other for who started it, and start working on getting the damned thing put out.

Nope.

Good.

There is no dealing with liberals.  They have proven it over, and over, and over ad infinitum.  When it gets to the point that you cannot deal reasonably with another party, the only other answer is to defeat them.  The way that happens is drawing a distinct difference between yourself and them, articulate your position, and win people over.

Yes, the Democratic party is just as bad as the Republican party. But you're not winning people over by calling them evil, or by calling liberalism evil. You need to understand this - you're winning nobody. Not a single soul. Why do you think the Democrats were even able to take as big of a majority as they did in the last election cycle?

Stop targeting liberalism and start targeting the Democratic Party. And the Republican Party. They both represent corporate interests and totalitarianism, and are largely enemies to the American people. Like it or not, you cannot represent the views of the American people with a strictly conservative party. More conservative than liberal, maybe... but you cannot wipe out half of the political spectrum. Can't, won't, and never will, even if you embrace totalitarianism and try to stamp it out. No dictator or tyrant yet has been able to stamp out either conservative or liberal thinking, because they are both as old as the ancient political debate itself.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

No, those are authoritarian agendas.

Get your facts straight, boy.

Do you care to debate the dictionary? Or are the standard definitions of liberal, conservative, and authoritarian all incorrect?

There is nothing liberal about liberalism but they still call themselves liberals. I will not apologize for using their nomenclature, bastardized though it may be. The call themselves liberals but they are as AUTHORITARIAN as any pissant tin pot dictator. Your beef isn't with me but with the regressive progressives and illiberal liberals.

Your Hitler brush-slap is still misplaced. Conservatives--as defined by conservatives--subscibe to nothing that served as the vehicle of Hitler's power. The closer you get to true American conservativism--as defined by conservatives--the more unlikely any authoritarian figure could emerge. That's what we're conserving and it has none of the trappings of authoritarianism.

[Doppelganger]

There is nothing liberal about liberalism but they still call themselves liberals. I will not apologize for using their nomenclature, bastardized though it may be. The call themselves liberals but they are as AUTHORITARIAN as any pissant tin pot dictator. Your beef isn't with me but with the regressive progressives and illiberal liberals.

Your Hitler brush-slap is still misplaced. Conservatives--as defined by conservatives--subscibe to nothing that served as the vehicle of Hitler's power. The closer you get to true American conservativism--as defined by conservatives--the more unlikely any authoritarian figure could emerge. That's what we're conserving and it has none of the trappings of authoritarianism.

But I am not authoritarian, and I am liberal on some issues, conservative on others. Fiscally, I am very conservative. And when I say 'liberal', I mean real liberalism, not the bastardized version you so often see in America. There are many more like me - most of them, of course, are not on debate boards. How do we express our political views without being labeled as crazies by either conservatives or 'liberals'? You see that even coming here, I have to defend myself from being called an authoritarian who has embraced the same authoritarian principles that the Democratic party has even though I don't share those views. This is the problem I want to point out - the systemic hatred that has been bred in Americans against one another when there is no need for it to exist. It needs to be redirected at the people who do deserve it.

You are correct that Hitler was far more authoritarian than he was conservative. However, saying he was liberal - if we're talking about real liberalism, not the pseudo-liberalism espoused by the DP - is also incorrect.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Problem is the words mean whatever people want them to mean.  Talking about modern American Conservatives and what they define themselves to be is problematic right there because even that means different things to different ones.  And if you go there, you can't take the Conservatives' definition of Liberal as meaning anything, you'd have to get the modern American Liberal's opinion on what that means to them.

Then trying to bootstrap people from other times and places into those modern American floating-point definitions is just piling logical flaws and defective analogies on top of each other.  Going back to 'Other times and places' means looking at contexts where support of the divine right of kings was Conservative and being for democratically-elected government was Liberal, and Fascism is indeed a lot more like the former than the latter, and also irrelevant to the present.  The whole stupid charade of trying to stick the other side with ugly historical figures is a meaningless diversion of mental effort and accomplishes about as much as playing a video game.   

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

But I am not authoritarian, and I am liberal on some issues, conservative on others. Fiscally, I am very conservative. And when I say 'liberal', I mean real liberalism, not the bastardized version you so often see in America. There are many more like me - most of them, of course, are not on debate boards. How do we express our political views without being labeled as crazies by either conservatives or 'liberals'? You see that even coming here, I have to defend myself from being called an authoritarian who has embraced the same authoritarian principles that the Democratic party has even though I don't share those views. This is the problem I want to point out - the systemic hatred that has been bred in Americans against one another when there is no need for it to exist. It needs to be redirected at the people who do deserve it.

You are correct that Hitler was far more authoritarian than he was conservative. However, saying he was liberal - if we're talking about real liberalism, not the pseudo-liberalism espoused by the DP - is also incorrect.

And what do you consider yourself definitionally liberal about?

Speaking ONLY for myself I think I can make reasonable--and even conservative--arguments for such things as the FDA.

I have no desire to see gays punished by laws but I refuse to deprive the entire populace the right to enact laws that reflect their values on matters such as military enlistment and marriage.

I'm against the legalization of maijuana but I'm FOR the freedom to vote for it.

I'm dead set against such things as heavy-handed business regulation, regulations and taxation for glow-bull warming, elective abortion etc

[dandi]

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100114/NEWS01/1140332/Palin-to-allow-media-to-cover-Tea-Party-speech
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/11/palin-to-headline-tea-party-convention.html

I can keep finding more sources if you'd like - my only point was the $500+ cost to attend and Palin's nice little paycheck. Even conservative sources won't dispute that.

Strike that: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/No_fee.html?showall

So, I'll give you that it looks like Palin did it for free but was offered the $100k, for which I applaud her.

The lesson here is look before you leap.  

The organizer of the event, however, is still raking in the dough. Not so grassroots, eh?

So, the organizer of an event has to pay for the space, utilities, janitorial services, et cetera and that somehow proves that the Tea Parties are beholden to a political party?

How many knots did you have to tie yourself into to come up with that?

More importantly - don't go to lib websites for analysis, that crap will rot your brain faster than MTV.

No, I was talking about the MA election, not VA.

Got it.  Now, how was electing someone who is against obamacare and for tax cuts a bad thing?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

"The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object."

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."

And, most importantly...

"If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it."

And this proves he's a centrist how exactly?

Our house is on fire. Stop worrying about blaming each other for who started it, and start working on getting the damned thing put out.

I am, I'm working to get rid of the leftists.

Good.

Wow!  Thank you!

 

Yes, the Democratic party is just as bad as the Republican party. But you're not winning people over by calling them evil, or by calling liberalism evil. You need to understand this - you're winning nobody. Not a single soul.

Okay, I'm going to say this one more time.  Make sure you read it slowly so you can grasp every word:  Draw a clear distinction between yourself and the other side, articulate your position, convince people that common sense government is a good thing.

Recent off year and special election results show that you are wrong.  Common sense conservatism works every time it is tried, the results do not lie.

Why do you think the Democrats were even able to take as big of a majority as they did in the last election cycle?

Because the republicans did not govern as they had promised.  This really isn't that hard.

Stop targeting liberalism and start targeting the Democratic Party. And the Republican Party.

Right now, liberalism is the democrat party.  Their RINO comrades are in serious jeopardy as well.

They both represent corporate interests and totalitarianism, and are largely enemies to the American people.

What is your hard-on with corporations?  Really, I'm curious.

Like it or not, you cannot represent the views of the American people with a strictly conservative party. More conservative than liberal, maybe... but you cannot wipe out half of the political spectrum.

Right now, I'm looking to stop the car from going off the cliff.  Conservatism will do that.

Can't, won't, and never will, even if you embrace totalitarianism and try to stamp it out. No dictator or tyrant yet has been able to stamp out either conservative or liberal thinking, because they are both as old as the ancient political debate itself.

As a conservative, I do not embrace any type of totalitarianism.  I am looking to stop those who do.  It's not like I haven't been saying that for several posts.

[Doppelganger]

And what do you consider yourself definitionally liberal about?

I believe censorship is an enemy of freedom of expression.
I believe in a tolerant attitude towards foreigners and foreign culture, but not a foolhardy attitude that lacks caution.
I believe in rights for gays, but not if those rights are against the will of majority.
Ditto your views on marijuana.
I am not certain whether I believe the media hype about global warming, however, I do believe in reducing our environmental footprint and trying not to f*** up natural habitats.

However, I also believe in:
Getting rid of 'big government'.
Getting rid of 'heavy-handed business regulation', as you put it.
Reducing the role and scope of the Federal government until it is an organization that binds the American people only because they choose to let it bind them, not because it holds them hostage.

Kinda hard to identify with either liberals or conservatives in this country, but I share bits and pieces of both philosophies.