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.
Yes, it is the only thing to counter the federal government.
Quote:
Do you support limited government intervention into your personal beliefs?
I would hope everyone would, after all, freedom to live your life as you see it called Liberty.
Quote:
Do you support the right to have the voice of the people be the voice of your government?
Well again, I would hope that anyone living in a Democratic form of government would want this, regardless of if they are conservative or liberal or whatever.
Quote:
Do you support a policy of this country's interests being above those of the rest of the world's?
Too vague. What are the best interest of the country? Is it to the citizens, is it to business interests, or something other?
I have just recently attempted to show how traditional or paleoconservatism has changed, morphed and splintered into a variety of different views of what conservatism is. From what I see from most people today, it would seem the prevailing form of conservatism is a very liberal one, as indicated by a progressive and liberal foreign policy, a tendency to pander to religious or ideological causes which I see as another form of entitlement or social engineering.
I don't think there are very many traditional conservatives anymore, nor do I think many people want to accept the responsibility of what it would take to be pure to our founders intentions, if it is even possible anymore.
Yes, and it worked great until the Neo-conservatives and democrats took power and has been slowly ruining everything... and after they ruin everything they blamed it on the Constitution... funny thing, was they didn't follow the Constitution... making laws that made them more money in the end...
I disagree, otherwise they would have provided an expiration date on the Constitution.
Not exactly the familiar concept in the late 18th century that it is today. The founders wished neither to be slaves of the past, or masters of the future. The amendment and convention processes are set out as proof. There are many writings from the founders exhorting future generations to the same salutary exercises as they themselves had engaged in. Perhaps you should look into a few of those...
Any daaaaaayyyyyy now .............................................:roll eyes:
LOL...things will get easier after 1-20-2009. Then we impeach Scalia and Alito, and we'll at last be headed back toward being the country that we ought to be...
Our founders' intentions were that we of the future would figure things out for ourselves...
Well being this thread was pointing out conservatism, I was viewing this from an adherence to the framework which is our Constitution. The genius of course is that our founding fathers understood that they didn't understand everything and so provided for the ability to change it. Even still, it is based upon a foundation that they spent a great deal of effort and care to formulate.
I don't know Saga, our ability to think since the days of our inception have not diminished, but I think the desire for the common man to want to has. Much of the overreach of our government today could be quashed if a very strict adherence to the Constitution were enforced. While not the solution to everything, it would take us much further forward than where we are now, which is starting to look at bit like the early Middle Ages.
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.