Obviously you do want (and, for the sake of partisan rhetoric, need) them to be. But, again, the Jewish people /= Israel’s government.
She is anti-Semite racist. Therefore she must be a conservative. Quod est demonstratum.
Well, the Republican party should find it easy to primary her, then.
This claim does not agree with this earlier claim:
The earlier allegation is correct. The Benjamins are flowing from pro-Israel folks (presumably Jews) to American Politicians (presumably not-Jews) in order to convince the politicians to adopt a pro-Israel stance. Not only is that not anti-Semitic, it’s not controversial or surprising or out of the ordinary for politics. It’s what everybody with an axe to grind does with every politician they can write a check to.
The first allegation is pants on head stupid. It isn’t a comment about Jews being money hungry, it’s a comment about politicians being money hungry, which you know, because you already said it. But, since you MUST find a way to call Democrats anti-Semitic, you’ll just forget about what you said the first time, and hope we all have a stroke between reading the two posts.
I suspect that by this point most of the actual conservatives are hiding under the bed with their hands over their ears. They’ve got a choice between supporting someone who violates nearly everything they used to hold while claiming their name; and supporting candidates who explicitly disagree with them on most issues. I wish they’d resurface in the primaries, in which they could try to make other choices; but I don’t have much hope for it, and I do think it’s fair to blame them for not doing so. I don’t think it’s fair to blame all conservatives for Trump, who is not one. He’s a totalitarian; and opposing totalitarianism used to be a strongly held conservative value (that one I do agree with; although I’m most definitely not a conservative.)
I don’t understand where this idea that self reliance is a conservative value, red state America takes is much more reliant on federal tax dollars than blue state America and they are constantly dodging taking personal responsibility. Look at their resistance to addressing climate change, they want to be able to pollute and not clean up after themselves. Also, whey do they keep changing the subject of this thread to attack women Democrats?
Yes I can see there is much misunderstanding. Self-reliance has nothing to do with how much money the government is moving from one state to another. Personal responsibility has to do with an individual’s actions. If you would like to talk about fiscal prudence, look at the debt levels of individuals or bankruptcy rates. I don’t know what they are, but your statistic about government distributions is meaningless.
If you want to say conservatives don’t clean up after themselves, let’s look at the conditions of property in conservative vs. liberal areas. Let’s look at pollution in liberal cities vs. pollution in conservative areas.
I think perhaps your misunderstanding is rooted in a misunderstanding of personal responsibility as conceived by conservatives.
Consenting adults marrying who they wish is a “Conservative Value”? That’s new information to me.
Conservatism has either given us the leviathan state we currently have or has been powerless to prevent it. That is why you see many on the right rejecting conservatism and instead going for the right wing socialist, or fascist if you like, approach that Trump has.
Many on the New Right reject conservatism explicitly. Those conservatives that still exist are relegated to think tanks, failing publications, and irrelevant academic pursuits. That is if they haven’t basically joined with the Democratic Party - Max Boot, Bill Kristol, David Brooks types.
For some reason the word “conservatism” is still used interchangeably with “right-wing”.
That’s not what you said. What you said was “everyone gets treated equally”. You understand that is a meaningless phrase until you put some meat on it? You understand that a conservative would agree with your original statement and not your application of that principle? Right?
I mean if you are simply playing games that’s cool, but not something I’m interested in.
Are you telling us that equal treatment is nice in theory, but not if you have to *do *it?
Of course they would. That’s how one knows that conservatives don’t actually want equal rights for all.
No they don’t want the liberal conception of equal rights for all. They want the conservative conception of equal rights for all.
A conservative would favor a flat tax. A liberal would favor a progressive tax. A conservative could easily say that liberals do not favor equal rights for all, except they would be more likely to understand the opposing position according to research by Haidt.
If a conservative heard a known conservative say “I support equal rights for all.” They’d be on board. If they heard a known liberal say it, they would not be on board because they understand the underlying ideology.
Which apparently means pretending we already have that, so nothing needs to change.
Except that the conservative would not admit that a flat tax is regressive, not “equal”.
Can you give us one example of something that the conservatives have done to promote equal rights for all? One bill? Anything at all in practice?
I’ll wait…
US Constitution
A flat tax as in everyone pays an equal percentage or everyone pays an equal amount. Either way it is equal.
Are you seriously trying to claim that it’s not a part of the modern right? Liberals only practice identity politics to keep up with conservatives, and frankly, we’re not nearly as good at it as you guys.
You know why the majority of gays are liberal? Because of decades of conservatives telling their base that we’re a threat to them and their way of life.
You know why the majority of hispanics are liberal? Because of decades of conservatives telling their base that they’re a threat to them and their way of life.
You know why the majority of blacks are liberal? Because of decades of conservatives telling their base that they’re a threat to them and their way of life.
And on, and on, and on. Identity politics were invented by the right, and they are by far the most skilled practitioners of it in American politics. Gay marriage bans were identity politics. Jim Crow was identity politics. Trump’s border policies are identity politics. Identity politics are the only conservative value that the Republican party hasn’t abandoned in the last four years. They’ve given up on fiscal responsibility. They’ve given up on family values. All they’ve got left is white grievances, and they’re pushing that one in up to the hilt. Everything else they’ve ever valued has given way to that.
The one that allowed slavery? Is that treating everyone equally?