For true conservatives disenchanted with the GOP

GTKeeper

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2005
1,118
0
0
http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/d...F04C9596A3EF81822D9F8E


Summary, former National Review publisher expresses his thoughts on Obama and the current state of the conservative movement.


It feels good that I am not alone in my 'what the hell happend to the conservative ideal' thought.... Hopefully this election leads to an opportunity of putting true pragmatists into power that will steer our beloved country into the right direction.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
A strong, reasonable conservative voice is seriously lacking in this forum. Where is our Buckley?

A Conservative for Obama
My party has slipped its moorings. It?s time for a true pragmatist to lead the country.
Leading Off By Wick Allison, Editor In Chief

THE MORE I LISTEN TO AND READ ABOUT ?the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate,? the more I like him. Barack Obama strikes a chord with me like no political figure since Ronald Reagan. To explain why, I need to explain why I am a conservative and what it means to me.

In 1964, at the age of 16, I organized the Dallas County Youth for Goldwater. My senior thesis at the University of Texas was on the conservative intellectual revival in America. Twenty years later, I was invited by William F. Buckley Jr. to join the board of National Review. I later became its publisher.

Conservatism to me is less a political philosophy than a stance, a recognition of the fallibility of man and of man?s institutions. Conservatives respect the past not for its antiquity but because it represents, as G.K. Chesterton said, the democracy of the dead; it gives the benefit of the doubt to customs and laws tried and tested in the crucible of time. Conservatives are skeptical of abstract theories and utopian schemes, doubtful that government is wiser than its citizens, and always ready to test any political program against actual results.

Liberalism always seemed to me to be a system of ?oughts.? We ought to do this or that because it?s the right thing to do, regardless of whether it works or not. It is a doctrine based on intentions, not results, on feeling good rather than doing good.

But today it is so-called conservatives who are cemented to political programs when they clearly don?t work. The Bush tax cuts?a solution for which there was no real problem and which he refused to end even when the nation went to war?led to huge deficit spending and a $3 trillion growth in the federal debt. Facing this, John McCain pumps his ?conservative? credentials by proposing even bigger tax cuts. Meanwhile, a movement that once fought for limited government has presided over the greatest growth of government in our history. That is not conservatism; it is profligacy using conservatism as a mask.

Today it is conservatives, not liberals, who talk with alarming bellicosity about making the world ?safe for democracy.? It is John McCain who says America?s job is to ?defeat evil,? a theological expansion of the nation?s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth.

This kind of conservatism, which is not conservative at all, has produced financial mismanagement, the waste of human lives, the loss of moral authority, and the wreckage of our economy that McCain now threatens to make worse.

Barack Obama is not my ideal candidate for president. (In fact, I made the maximum donation to John McCain during the primaries, when there was still hope he might come to his senses.) But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don?t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama?s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.

Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened.

?Every great cause,? Eric Hoffer wrote, ?begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.? As a cause, conservatism may be dead. But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.
 

QED

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2005
3,428
3
0
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...
 

GTKeeper

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2005
1,118
0
0
Originally posted by: QED
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...

I wonder who Buckley would have voted for....
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: QED
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...

Yes, the Publisher of the NATIONAL REVIEW selected by WILLIAM BUCKLEY is on the Kool-Aid. You sir are apparently drinking Drain-O.

Read the article, he addresses why McCain is the wrong man for the job, in his view.
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
That was a waste of my time. I don't like the direction of either party both are to far away from center. McCain is a hell of a lot closer to the center than rubber stamp obama. If elected Obama would just be a yes man to Pelosi and the crazy leftists of the democratic party. No matter how crazy and shitty the bills Pelosi gets passed Obama will rubber stamp them over and over. A vote for Obama is really a vote for Pelosi to run this country. Obama does not have the stones to ever stand up to his own party.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Obama as a conservative, I think NOT!

Bush neither for that matter along with his administration. Nothing short of a mess Bush is leaving us with and that is unfortunate as there are some things that could have been handled much better and would have changed our view of his administration 180 degrees.

Nor is McCain a conservative. He is talking up the conservative base with Palin, and that may be enough. But we need true Reagan style conservatism back inthe Whiote House and neither of these candidates come close. One a socialist dem and one a moderate to liberal repub.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,843
10,148
136
Obama is the solution in a long winded and twisted way.

You see, if McCain succeeds as GWB did, then the Republican Party will continue to embrace pandering to the socialists and keep supporting pro-government types. If people like Bush and McCain were unelectable and the Dems kept them out of office, then that dismal failure would result in reprioritizing the Republican agenda.

Unfortunately, why would one arm of the government ever decide to shoot itself in the foot? True conservative sentiment cannot originate and succeed from within the government itself, this movement must be an outside force from among the general populace.

That is also why McCain is a dismal failure even if he wins the election. The only thing he promised us that he?ll deliver on is to work with the Democrats to pass their agenda.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,379
126
Originally posted by: dphantom
Obama as a conservative, I think NOT!

Bush neither for that matter along with his administration. Nothing short of a mess Bush is leaving us with and that is unfortunate as there are some things that could have been handled much better and would have changed our view of his administration 180 degrees.

Nor is McCain a conservative. He is talking up the conservative base with Palin, and that may be enough. But we need true Reagan style conservatism back inthe Whiote House and neither of these candidates come close. One a socialist dem and one a moderate to liberal repub.

Reagan was a fantastic speaker and a good man. But his era and policies were not something golden. Look at the deficits and spending under Reagan (given, the (D) Congress must shoulder a fair share of that as well!). Then compare Bush I to Clinton to Bush II, and you can CLEARLY see that regardless of who is in the Oval Office, spending and deficits continue to go up. Ironically, it was Slick Willie and the (R) Congress which has had the best track record on the budget and spending. The WORST case scenario by FAR has been (R) 2000-2006, in full control. What a disaster.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
I think the article did get it right. The idea that the nanny state is bad is gone within the majority of the republican party. We now have two big govt parties with different social values.
 

QED

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2005
3,428
3
0
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: QED
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...

Yes, the Publisher of the NATIONAL REVIEW selected by WILLIAM BUCKLEY is on the Kool-Aid. You sir are apparently drinking Drain-O.

Yes, and George H.W. Bush hand-picked David Souter for a Supreme Court nomination, but that doesn't mean that what David Souter has done with that nomination is indicative of what George H.W. Bush believes in.

And yes, anyone who honestly believes that voting for Obama will bring a reduction in wasteful spending and usher back in an era of a small, but responsive and accountable government is drinking the Kool-Aid.

 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: QED
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: QED
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...

Yes, the Publisher of the NATIONAL REVIEW selected by WILLIAM BUCKLEY is on the Kool-Aid. You sir are apparently drinking Drain-O.

Yes, and George H.W. Bush hand-picked David Souter for a Supreme Court nomination, but that doesn't mean that what David Souter has done with that nomination is indicative of what George H.W. Bush believes in.

And yes, anyone who honestly believes that voting for Obama will bring a reduction in wasteful spending and usher back in an era of a small, but responsive and accountable government is drinking the Kool-Aid.

I didn't realize the Supreme Court of the United States was the country's leading conservative publication. huh.

Attacking the messenger in this case is pretty desperate. If Buckley himself came out for Obama for the same reasons as outlined above you'd probably call him a lefty too.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
81
Many people are disgusted with the party of evil, and are deploying for the party of stupid.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
Originally posted by: QED
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...

distortion.

Both candidates will undoubtedly grow government.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
Originally posted by: quest55720
That was a waste of my time. I don't like the direction of either party both are to far away from center. McCain is a hell of a lot closer to the center than rubber stamp obama. If elected Obama would just be a yes man to Pelosi and the crazy leftists of the democratic party. No matter how crazy and shitty the bills Pelosi gets passed Obama will rubber stamp them over and over. A vote for Obama is really a vote for Pelosi to run this country. Obama does not have the stones to ever stand up to his own party.

speculation and guilt by association.

Pelosi's approval numbers are horrible as is congress (and deservedly so) but you can't spend all day tying Pelosi to Obama and make a rational argument to not vote for Obama.

Obama got the nod from the dem side, not Pelosi.



 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
Originally posted by: Genx87
I think the article did get it right. The idea that the nanny state is bad is gone within the majority of the republican party. We now have two big govt parties with different social values.

sounds about right.
 

GTKeeper

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2005
1,118
0
0
Originally posted by: OrByte
Originally posted by: Genx87
I think the article did get it right. The idea that the nanny state is bad is gone within the majority of the republican party. We now have two big govt parties with different social values.

sounds about right.

+1
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,764
6,770
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Many people are disgusted with the party of evil, and are deploying for the party of stupid.

I disagree. I don't think Barr will get many votes. But thanks for the inane post, right up there with those of QED.
 

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
13,805
11,447
136
Originally posted by: GTKeeper
Originally posted by: OrByte
Originally posted by: Genx87
I think the article did get it right. The idea that the nanny state is bad is gone within the majority of the republican party. We now have two big govt parties with different social values.

sounds about right.

+1

I think that's entirely reasonable.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,764
6,770
126
The article, for those of you too brain dead to comprehend what you read or too lazy to actually do so, made a case for Obama based on a character assessment by the author that Obama is deeply pragmatic by nature. The author feels it is critical at the juncture in our history, despite political differences he has with Obama, that Obama be elected over the deeply impractical McSame.

Instead of intelligent reactions, all we get is Bot Spew from the imbecilic Knee-Jerks.
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
Originally posted by: OrByte
Originally posted by: quest55720
That was a waste of my time. I don't like the direction of either party both are to far away from center. McCain is a hell of a lot closer to the center than rubber stamp obama. If elected Obama would just be a yes man to Pelosi and the crazy leftists of the democratic party. No matter how crazy and shitty the bills Pelosi gets passed Obama will rubber stamp them over and over. A vote for Obama is really a vote for Pelosi to run this country. Obama does not have the stones to ever stand up to his own party.

speculation and guilt by association.

Pelosi's approval numbers are horrible as is congress (and deservedly so) but you can't spend all day tying Pelosi to Obama and make a rational argument to not vote for Obama.

Obama got the nod from the dem side, not Pelosi.

When has Obama stood up to Pelosi and called her out? He had yet another chance this week with the bullshit Pelosi energy bill. Obama had a chance to call the bill for what it is and introduce his own. Instead he is endorsing her bill with his silence on the issue. Peliso will have a super majority and will be able to pass almost anything. The only thing standing in the way is a president that will veto some of her bullshit.
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Good read, poor decision. It looks like the only thing the author agrees with Obama is chicken isolationist foreign policy.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
81
Originally posted by: JS80
Good read, poor decision. It looks like the only thing the author agrees with Obama is chicken isolationist foreign policy.

Obama is certainly no isolationist. He is an interventionist and an imperialist, just like the man who he's running against.
 

QED

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2005
3,428
3
0
Yes, I've read the article, and yes, I at one time believed the same things about Obama: although I disgreed with him on the issues, I thought he was an intelligent, pragmatic man who could maybe bring some common sense back to Washington.

Then, as I learned more about Obama the more I realized he was yet another bead in a long chain of well-packaged but totally contrived politicians--his words sound great, but they ring hollow.

I have long disliked John McCain for many of his policy stands, but I have no doubts that he actually believes what he says and is more likely to be able to accomplish it than Obama.

The only premise of a true conservative accepting an Obama presidency is if you believe the "it took 4 years of Jimmy Carter to bring us Ronald Reagan" philsophy.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: QED
Yes, obviously the best answer to free-spending Rebublicans is to vote in a free-spending AND tax-raising Obama. I'm really sure we'll see smaller budgets and smaller government under Obama. He can really bring change. And hope. And, mmmm.... this Kook-Aid tastes good...

No shit. ANY "true conservative" the OP describes should be nowhere close to embracing BHO. Now if by "true conservative" he means Andrew Sullivan conservative(which is liberal) then maybe he would have a point and a case but Buckley is spinning in his grave with this sort of nonsense.