Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only current 2012 GOP candidate who uses the phrase "common sense" consistently is Herman Cain. He has both intellect and business as well as monetary policy experience. So, your point would be what exactly?
Here's my point. Conservatism today has a major anti-intellectual streak. Many rail against "elitists" and champion "Joe the Plumber" types (Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity do this)--that don't have book smarts but supposedly have common sense. The implication is that academics and elitists are not as good as the regular folks at governing. And I don't think that's always the case. Common sense is a good thing, but that's not all it takes to run a major world power. I want my president to have a thorough knowledge of economics, statecraft, foreign policy, history, and political science. Simply knowing how to balance your home budget doesn't hurt, but it doesn't cut it with me either.
Brooks is the New York Times’ conservative columnist. He was schooled at the late William F. Buckley’s National Review, William Kristol’s Weekly Standard, and Murdoch’s Washington Times.
He lists in successive paragraphs movement beliefs that distinguish it from a normal political party. Brooks refrains from calling today’s GOP a cult, but that is what it sounds like.
First evidence is ”members of this movement do not accept the logic of compromise, no matter how sweet the terms.”
Brooks next writes “members of this movement do not accept the legitimacy of scholars and intellectual authorities.”
your reasoning as to why he is a conservative would be like my saying every kid that goes to Cal is a liberal. What kind of desparate reasoning are you using?
Here's my point. Conservatism today has a major anti-intellectual streak. Many rail against "elitists" and champion "Joe the Plumber" types (Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity do this)--that don't have book smarts but supposedly have common sense. The implication is that academics and elitists are not as good as the regular folks at governing. And I don't think that's always the case. Common sense is a good thing, but that's not all it takes to run a major world power. I want my president to have a thorough knowledge of economics, statecraft, foreign policy, history, and political science. Simply knowing how to balance your home budget doesn't hurt, but it doesn't cut it with me either.
Tell that to Thomas Sowell, Ben Stein, Condi Rice or Clanence Thomas for starters. Your reasoning is about as off base as the Ops.
your reasoning as to why he is a conservative would be like my saying every kid that goes to Cal is a liberal. What kind of desparate reasoning are you using?
This is my reasoning.
Brooks is the New York Times’ conservative columnist. He was schooled at the late William F. Buckley’s National Review, William Kristol’s Weekly Standard, and Murdoch’s Washington Times.
This moment, that I fully expected (as I said in another thread). To quote The Economist...
"It is because the vast majority of Republicans, driven on by the wilder-eyed members of their party and the cacophony of conservative media, are clinging to the position that not a single cent of deficit reduction must come from a higher tax take. This is economically illiterate and disgracefully cynical."
That seems quite normal considering the participants... now off to counting seconds before someone pops in with "logic" and calls "The Economist" a left wing source...
Brooks is the New York Times’ conservative columnist. He was schooled at the late William F. Buckley’s National Review, William Kristol’s Weekly Standard, and Murdoch’s Washington Times.
and that makes him a conservative? Did you read my post and understand it? This is like saying Juan WIlliams is a conservative because he is a FOX contributor or the same with Geraldo. Who trained you or gave you a start doesn't mean beans in some cases.
and that makes him a conservative? Did you read my post and understand it? This is like saying Juan WIlliams is a conservative because he is a FOX contributor or the same with Geraldo. Who trained you or gave you a start doesn't mean beans in some cases.
Nita
Please do tell what makes for a conservative in your opinion,
........ Common sense is a good thing, but that's not all it takes to run a major world power. I want my president to have a thorough knowledge of economics, statecraft, foreign policy, history, and political science. Simply knowing how to balance your home budget doesn't hurt, but it doesn't cut it with me either.
And yet it was perfectly acceptable to hire a candidate that had none of the qualities you list above (Obama) . It was then perfectly acceptable for him to appoint a Sec. of the Treasury who cheated on his taxes and blamed it on "TurboTax" (when we all really know the appointment was a payback to Timmy's father). Is this the kind of intellectualism you defend? Really?
Conservatism does not have an "anti-intellectual" streak at all. However, it does make good talking points for the left to minimize Conservatives in such a fashion. No one should ever equate academic acheivement with intellect. If it were then why are IQ tests administered before children enter elementary school instead of at the end of their senior year or as a qualifyer for college entry?
Since when did supporting the Constitution and ideals that made this country great and representing that segment of society along with the rest become "anti-intellectual"? Oddly enough, that was exactly what the Democrat party used to do before it was hijacked by the Progressives, Marxists, and Mao lovers.
Tell that to Thomas Sowell, Ben Stein, Condi Rice or Clanence Thomas for starters. Your reasoning is about as off base as the Ops.
NIta
Perhaps you missed this quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by mackinac81
For the record, I think conservatives can be intellectuals. I know some smart conservatives, but for some reason most rank and file conservatives don't listen to those types, unfortunately.
The guys you mentioned, as well as George Will, Milton Friedman etc...aren't the ones everyone goes around quoting. Nobody actually listens to those guys, unfortunately. Most conservatives today just parrot Talk Radio and Fox News talking points because its easier to process than a George Will column. I doubt many even read the National Review.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
