# the 'Ten Conservative Principles': worth debating? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 25, 2009, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861 "2009-11-25T02:20:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/21 "2009-11-25T14:35:35Z")
Some more general comments: In #2, they “oppose Obama-style government run healthcare.” I guess that gives them room to say they support Medicare, which is single-payer health insurance for everyone over 65, and the Veterans Administration health care system, which is fully government-run health care, doing for our veterans what Britain’s National Health does for Britons. (If they oppose Medicare and/or VA, they should have the courage to say so explicitly.) In conjunction with #9, that they oppose “health care rationing and denial of health care,” that certainly puts them in opposition to #1, because without rationing of some sort, there’s really no way to limit Medicare costs, which if allowed to go unchecked, will be the ultimate budget-buster. The choices are: rationing health care, severely cutting back Medicare, or bankrupting the government. Choose your poison. Like I said, if they want to come out against Medicare, or for massive cuts to Medicare, that’s fine. But they’re not going to do it. And finally, I’m amused by #3: “We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation.” Dudes, what do you think cap-and-trade IS? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/22 "2009-11-25T14:41:58Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Eliminate the death tax. There is no such thing. The estate tax is for windfalls that wealthy individuals get when someone dies. Person A works hard and makes $500,000. Person B inherits $500,000. Why should person B get it tax free? Don’t give me that crap about it already being taxed. Most of it hasn’t. Joe buys 1000 shares of Acme at $10 per share, or $10,000. By the time he dies, it is worth $1000 per shore, or $1,000,000. Joe Jr inherits those 1000 shares, and with it the $990,000 profit. When was tax ever paid on that profit? It wasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![SecondJudith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@SecondJudith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SecondJudith)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/23 "2009-11-25T14:42:09Z")
[QUOTE=AP article] AP article (1) We support … by opposing…; (2) We support … and oppose…; (3) We support … by opposing…; (4) We support … by opposing…; (5) We support … by opposing…; (6) We support … by supporting…; (7) We support … effective action…; (8) We support …; (9) We support … by opposing…; and (10) We support … by opposing … [/QUOTE] Huh. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/24 "2009-11-25T15:19:52Z")
_We support … by opposing…_ I suggest that this phrase become the new Republican tag-line. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/25 "2009-11-25T15:22:19Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > The GOP keeps moving to the right. Reagan used to be an extremist, now he is a moderate by GOP standards. Same with Gingrich. He used to be an extremist, but compared to people like Bachmann, King or Palin, he is moderate. Hell, I remember when Goldwater was an extremist. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/26 "2009-11-25T16:01:44Z")
I don’t know that Palin or Bachmann are to the right of Reagan. I doubt it. What makes them seem more extreme is their unwillingness to compromise or find any common ground at all. They practice a scorched earth style of politics, which frankly doesn’t actually serve the cause of conservatism. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/27 "2009-11-25T16:24:26Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I don’t know that Palin or Bachmann are to the right of Reagan. I doubt it. What makes them seem more extreme is their unwillingness to compromise or find any common ground at all. They practice a scorched earth style of politics, which frankly doesn’t actually serve the cause of conservatism. The modern GOP isn’t even more “right” than the GOP 1980-1995. It’s an orthogonal shift, not a lateral one. The modern GOP (and the teabaggers that straggle off of it into the statistical no-man’s-land) is more _batshit insane_ than Reagan or Goldwater or even Gingrich were. They offer, with a straight face, so-called reasoning and motivations that are only slightly less farcical than a Gilbert & Sullivan operetta. Their dogwhistles are becoming more and more audible to the average ear. The difference isn’t a question of quantity at this point, but of quality. There are substantive deviations from a straight-line extrapolation from the Republicans in 1980 to the Republicans in 2009. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/28 "2009-11-25T16:54:08Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Our President does not bow to anybody. :rolleyes: Who gives a fuck?! ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/29 "2009-11-25T16:58:34Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > (1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill; Looks like Ronald Reagan is out. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/30 "2009-11-25T17:08:58Z")
2 and 3 are both self-contradictory: Obama’s health coverage plan and cap-and-trade _are_ the free-market solutions. What we have right now are monopolies in health care and socialism in energy production. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/31 "2009-11-25T17:33:12Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Some more general comments: > > In #2, they “oppose Obama-style government run healthcare.” I guess that gives them room to say they support Medicare, which is single-payer health insurance for everyone over 65, and the Veterans Administration health care system, which is fully government-run health care, doing for our veterans what Britain’s National Health does for Britons. (If they oppose Medicare and/or VA, they should have the courage to say so explicitly.) That’s one I was going to comment on. What the hell is “Obama-style government-run health care”, anyway? The only government-run healthcare that currently exists in this country was present long before Obama took office, and from what I know of the current reform bills, to call the final reforms ‘government-run health care’ would be exceedingly generous. Anyway, it seems pretty clear from the commentary that these supposed principles are so much empty sloganeering. Presumably the RNC will recognize the lack of real content and reject any resolution based on them. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/32 "2009-11-25T17:39:25Z")
Well, they did insert six items between the two mutually exclusive ones, so they’ve at least provide the polite pretense of respect for the reader’s intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/33 "2009-11-25T17:42:04Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > So Bush gets 6/10 which is failing. Eh, good enough for a gentleman’s “C”… ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/34 "2009-11-25T18:22:22Z")
> [@AP](#): > > We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care… So, they’re opposed to private insurance then? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/35 "2009-11-25T18:39:17Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > …Our President does not bow to anybody. Absolutely not! Kissing and holding hands is all you get on a first date! ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/36 "2009-11-25T21:57:04Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Are you telling us that Reagan was a… a… S S Socialist? :eek: Nah, but apparently the second amendment becomes a whole lot less important when you get shot. Who knew? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/37 "2009-11-25T22:06:11Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > So Bush gets 6/10 which is failing. Oops. Dude, they’ve been running from his legacy so fast you’d think he was McCain or something. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/38 "2009-11-25T22:07:20Z")
I scanned it last night off huffington post or something, and I figure GW wouldn’t have passed 6 of them. Heh, maybe that would be a fun debate: how many would GW qualify for? ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/39 "2009-11-25T22:19:49Z")
How many does GW pass? (1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill; Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, signed by GW, implemented by Obama. (2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare; I guess this one GW will pass with flying colors. 🙂 Unless, of course, the Obama plan does ultimately include conservative-style ideals, like no tax payer dollars for abortion, in which case GW would also fail. (3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation; I don’t know what this is so I guess I’ll pass GW on this one. However, I’m sure if I dig into his sordid past as a Texas oilman, I’ll find something. (4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check; Same as #3. (5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants; Under the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007: “A heated public debate followed, which resulted in a substantial rift within the Republican Party, the majority of conservatives opposed it because of its legalization or amnesty provisions.” (6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges; Heh, Bush routinely ignored his military advisers, which is why most of them retired to blast him. Fail. (7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat; Bush has ignored both countries during his time in office. Fail. (8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act; Yep, he scores the homophobe award. (9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and Hmm. I’ll give a him a fail here. While he tried to undermine Roe vs. Wade by packing the Supreme Court with conservatives, thank God John Roberts isn’t Clarence Thomas Jr. (10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership. LOLOLOL. Anybody who thinks Bush supports gun rights never had to stand in the “Free Speech Zone.” Like most conservatives, they want the government to take away YOUR guns, not THEIRS. FAIL. Oo, looks like GW would pass 3 or 4, fail the rest. NO GNP SOUP FOR YOU! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2009, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861/40 "2009-11-25T22:54:43Z")
> [@Superhal](#): > > (6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges; > > Heh, Bush routinely ignored his military advisers, which is why most of them retired to blast him. Fail. Not quite right. Several generals warned him the U.S. could not securely occupy Iraq with fewer than 400,000 troops. They were **cashiered.** And the war went ahead with just 150,000. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ten-conservative-principles-worth-debating/518861.md?page=3)