You totally are totally mistaken about the origins of the term “neoconservative”.

You can sit back and say that Bush is not conservative, but you’re fooling yourself. He is a true, died-in-the-wool conservative. You may not like the result (certainly no one in their right mind does) but what we have is the result of conservative principles of government in action. What we have is exactly what we would have had if Reagan had had a pliant Republican congress.

It goes back to the observation that movement conservatives don’t believe in government. So how can they actually govern? Pretty much every federal agency has been rotting from the head for the past 7 years. This is because the people at the top are conservatives (and there has been no congressional oversight). They don’t believe that government is effective, and it’s become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Course, you’re a true believer and nothing you believe can be wrong, by definition, so it must be Bush who is not a conservative. He’s failed, so he must be a liberal! Classic. Taste the Kool-aid, baby!

This is why I don’t try anymore.

Noo, I know little about scientology, so I can’t comment meaningfully. But everyone always knew Bush (like his Dad) was never conservative. That’s why they coined the phrase ‘neoconservative’. Our Lord and Saviour, Ronald Reagan knew this even back in the ’80s. Unfortunately, ‘neoconservative’ seems to mean spend money in a way that might even embarrass a democrat, and solve almost as few problems as a liberal might!

It really came down to a simple choice: An imaginary lock-box fiending Gore, or a normal person who had a penchant for liberal ideas that have never worked. If you doubt me, take a closer look at the cheap government paid prescription program Bush came up with. There are not many escapades that could be more liberal, unless you came up with a ‘free tv/car/vacation/massage therapy’ program to insure that no one would have any goals in life.

But I digress. The point is that if you don’t think Bush has a liberal bent, it’s only because you don’t want to.

[Zython] “First off, I did read and responded to that. Secondly, why didn’t you bother to read when I said “What goes around comes around”? Or are you admitting that conservatives are immune to any sense of irony?”

You did SAY you understood it, but you certainly didn’t act like it :(. May just be me though! I haven’t been taking my vitamins, and I am irony deficient.

September 18, 2007 at 23:17

Silly people. Of course Bush isn’t a conservative now. Conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed.

IOW, it’s just like $cientology….NEAT!

First off, I did read and responded to that. Secondly, why didn’t you bother to read when I said “What goes around comes around”? Or are you admitting that conservatives are immune to any sense of irony?

And why the others are all in such danger. They’re such panderers, and proof that there is no American conservatism, there’s just authoritarianism. Kudos to Ron Paul for being his own nut.

Because, silly person, you inaccurately pointed it out. Inaccurate is quite different from accurate. You should know that!

Also, you’d know why it offended me if you bothered to read the last part of my statement, “Quite true though that we have a problem with people unable or unwilling to understand us.”

I suspect you are the unwilling type, but only because I don’t like to say people are incapable. That’s really for you to decide.

But it’s the base that’s soured on Bush, along with everybody else. There are easy votes there for candidates with guts.

Whoever wins the nomination.

Right now it’s all about red-meat for the base. Double Gitmo and America’s Mayor and waterboard the shit out of anyone who gets in our way.

Once the nomination is locked down, the winner will run away from Bush as fast as possible. It might not be a specific disavowal, but they’ll all be prattling on about “new directions” and “different vision”, and behind the scenes they’ll talk smack about what a cock-up old George has made of the situation and how only a Republican can fix the mess.

The press will eat that shit up.

It’s fascinating watching the Republican primary train-wreck. Who’s got the guts to disown the guy?

Then why did you whine like the wuss that you are when I accurately pointed out that you hate America? What goes around comes around, terrorist-lover.

Quite true though that we have a problem with people unable or unwilling to understand us.

Oh, no. I understand you just fine. I understand that you hate democracy more than anything. How’s that?

Those would be the same conservatives who called us “traitors” and “appeasers” for daring to point out the flaws in their leader and his policies?

We told you so. We told you so a long freakin’ time ago. It’s too late now to pretend otherwise. Particularly after tarring us as “un-American”. And now you come slinking along saying you never liked that George Bush guy anyway.

Nice try, but we don’t let the rats escape from the sinking ship without pointing out that they are, in fact, rats, and that they are responsible for sinking the ship in the first place. That’s an ad hominem, I guess, but it’s in the interests of extending the metaphor as far as it with stretch.

Even now you defend the Iraq occupation and support Bush in his efforts to run the clock out. Nothing has changed.

The idea that there’s an ounce of difference between conservatives and Republicans is ludicrous. The Republican party is the standard bearer for the conservative movement. The Republicans have governed according to the principles of conservatism.

You guys can wriggle like worms on a hook trying to distance yourselves from the dismal pit of Republican governance, but you’re not getting off. This is your failure. It is the failure of the conservative movement.

You lay down with pigs, you get porked.

-Kevin the Assyrian in a time of french cuisine.

You ultra-cons can dish it out, but it seems you can’t take it.