Per T:
On 01/14/2016 09:22 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
I suggest to the more extreme of those people that they take a few
months off, rent an apartment in Mogadishu and, if they survive, report
back on how things are with little or no government.


Pete,

This is a bad argument. Maybe not if you were conversing with
a libertarian.

Conservatives see the only three legitimate responsibilities
of the Central Government to be:

1) regulate the currency
2) protect from invasion
3) protect one citizen from another

The rest is for the states (10 amendment). A central

.....(lotta good stuff clipped)....

I will give you a "do over" on your "Mogadishu" argument.

That was pretty good.

I don't agree with all of it - but you clearly nailed me on Mogadishu.

One thing I take issue with - and it's not just your post; it's more a
me-against-the-rest-of-the-world thing - is the use of the word
"Conservative".

I don't like it's use as a blanket description of Republican Party
positions - especially those which advocate changing the status quo.

I don't know a better word.... "Right-Wing" is too pejorative.... but
"Conservative" to me is pretty much Merriam-Webster's third definition:

"a : tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or
institutions : traditional

b : marked by moderation or caution a conservative estimate

c : marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance,
style, or manners"

Based on that, I would say that people who want to change the status-quo
(no matter whether they perceive it as good or bad) are not
"Conservative".

Also, I'm big on the "Moderation or caution" aspect.

A conservative person, faced with a situation that has a significant
possibility of becoming catastrophic, will take remedial action to
prevent that situation.

They will *not* argue for delaying action because there is still some
doubt as to whether it actually will turn catastrophic... they will play
the odds and incur the expense to make sure it cannot happen.

"Conservative" people pay for homeowner's insurance - unless they are so
wealthy that losing a house is non-catastrophic for them.

Based on that, the Repub position on climate change is not conservative
at all.

Ditto the admonition to reduce the size of government - and, therefore
change the status quo. Certainly, the admonition to reduce government
"... to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in
the bathtub." is anything but conservative.
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist

But increasing the size/role of government is not conservative either.

OTOH, those who take a position against gay marriage (which, BTW, I
support) actually are conservative in Merriam-Webster's sense of the
word.

I am not saying that Conservative=Good or Non-Conservative=Bad.... there
are times for each.... And plenty shades of grey......

But I do quarrel with the blanket use of "Conservative" to describe
policies, actions, and political parties that are actually quite the
opposite.


--
Pete Cresswell