Onnidan Fan Forum

Discussion => Politics => Topic started by: Neymar on July 30, 2013, 06:29:59 PM

Title: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Neymar on July 30, 2013, 06:29:59 PM
I think this would be an interesting thread for discussing conservatism as a political, and social, belief system.

Oldsport mentioned in another thread of how he agreed with me on the fact that the republican party today is a pretty poor representation of conservatism.

I had an article published in the new statesman in 2003(Barely even a teen...Westminster had us hardcore at school :lol:) talking about conservative beliefs on government, and the role of the military as an act of globalization in the 21st century. The role of the government, as the largest power of the government, from my research showed Reagan's heavy funding as the bench mark for how conservatives(or even neo-Conservatives as Reaganites have shown themselves to be) view their government.

I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex? This century how would you like the US government to look? :)
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Bison66 on July 31, 2013, 06:27:53 AM
Neymar,

Good luck with this one.

Those three are incapable of that kind of nuanced thinking.  Regurgitation, yes.  Original, logical, fact-based discussion - NO.

Why not post your essay from 2003?  Sounds interesting.
O0
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: oldsport on July 31, 2013, 08:26:12 AM
I think this would be an interesting thread for discussing conservatism as a political, and social, belief system.

Oldsport mentioned in another thread of how he agreed with me on the fact that the republican party today is a pretty poor representation of conservatism.

I had an article published in the new statesman in 2003(Barely even a teen...Westminster had us hardcore at school :lol:) talking about conservative beliefs on government, and the role of the military as an act of globalization in the 21st century. The role of the government, as the largest power of the government, from my research showed Reagan's heavy funding as the bench mark for how conservatives(or even neo-Conservatives as Reaganites have shown themselves to be) view their government.

I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex? This century how would you like the US government to look? :)

I believe our military should be capable of meeting threats. The size and composition (weapons systems) of our military will be dictated by whatever threat they have to defeat to maintain the security of this nation.

I believe the US government is overextended with respect to it's constitution design (i.e. department of education etc.). The size and scope of US government should be in line with the enumerated powers the constitution directs.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on July 31, 2013, 08:58:21 AM
I think this would be an interesting thread for discussing conservatism as a political, and social, belief system.

Oldsport mentioned in another thread of how he agreed with me on the fact that the republican party today is a pretty poor representation of conservatism.

I had an article published in the new statesman in 2003(Barely even a teen...Westminster had us hardcore at school :lol:) talking about conservative beliefs on government, and the role of the military as an act of globalization in the 21st century. The role of the government, as the largest power of the government, from my research showed Reagan's heavy funding as the bench mark for how conservatives(or even neo-Conservatives as Reaganites have shown themselves to be) view their government.

I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex? This century how would you like the US government to look? :)

Q:  I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex?

A:  Historically this country has had a military that was too small to defend us.  Look at the War of 1812, The Civil War, The Spanish-American War, WW1, WW2, The Korean Conflict, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, and even the War on Terror.  With the Persian Gulf we had to heavily depend on reservists and the National Guard.  We had to have a draft in most of the other wars because we were not prepared militarily. 

We can have a small government and a military large enough to defend us. 

Q.  This century how would you like the US government to look?

A.  The legislative side of government needs to stop being so partisan and work for the good of the country.  If you are for something it should not matter if someone from another party says they are for the same thing you are.  It makes no sense.  All Republicans are not conservative.  All democrats are not liberal.  There are conservative democrats. 

We can not be the world police.  We also can not sit idly by when injustices are done throughout the world.  It's a fine line to walk.  We haven't been perfect.  I believe we have done a good job. 

On the judicial side we need to stop narrowing the nominees for the Supreme Court to judges.  Judges aren't the only ones who are qualified to be on the Supreme Court.  Look at how we select Supreme Court justices.  The president nominates someone.  The president is not required to be a judge.  The Senate confirms the nomination.  Senators aren't required to be a judge.  Yet, they believe only judges should be nominated.  If you find someone with sound judgment, that is fair minded, and will be able to decide cases on the merits.  Not on a political ideology. 

The executive has to always show strength.  Take the current president.  He has consistently signed the order to kill the No. 2 Al Qaeda person.  He took out Bin Laden with intel from 2007.  We don't need a perceived pushover in the Oval Office.  We also don't need a bully either. 

Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Neymar on July 31, 2013, 11:22:32 AM
I think this would be an interesting thread for discussing conservatism as a political, and social, belief system.

Oldsport mentioned in another thread of how he agreed with me on the fact that the republican party today is a pretty poor representation of conservatism.

I had an article published in the new statesman in 2003(Barely even a teen...Westminster had us hardcore at school :lol:) talking about conservative beliefs on government, and the role of the military as an act of globalization in the 21st century. The role of the government, as the largest power of the government, from my research showed Reagan's heavy funding as the bench mark for how conservatives(or even neo-Conservatives as Reaganites have shown themselves to be) view their government.

I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex? This century how would you like the US government to look? :)

I believe our military should be capable of meeting threats. The size and composition (weapons systems) of our military will be dictated by whatever threat they have to defeat to maintain the security of this nation.

I believe the US government is overextended with respect to it's constitution design (i.e. department of education etc.). The size and scope of US government should be in line with the enumerated powers the constitution directs.

Very Interesting.

That example, the department of education, raises a great question on standards. Who sets the standard then if not the government?

It seems government regulations have come into place to steady, for lack of a better term, the ship in terms of quality in things such as food and agriculture(USDA), Aviation safety(FAA), or even such basic things as infrastructure(USDOT). If such things are not present who establishes the standard of safety, and who builds. I'm sure the latter is answered by small businesses, but what about the former?
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Neymar on July 31, 2013, 11:35:57 AM
I think this would be an interesting thread for discussing conservatism as a political, and social, belief system.

Oldsport mentioned in another thread of how he agreed with me on the fact that the republican party today is a pretty poor representation of conservatism.

I had an article published in the new statesman in 2003(Barely even a teen...Westminster had us hardcore at school :lol:) talking about conservative beliefs on government, and the role of the military as an act of globalization in the 21st century. The role of the government, as the largest power of the government, from my research showed Reagan's heavy funding as the bench mark for how conservatives(or even neo-Conservatives as Reaganites have shown themselves to be) view their government.

I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex? This century how would you like the US government to look? :)

Q:  I'd like to ask you three how do you reconcile your belief(as conservatives) for smaller government with increased or even the need for a large military complex?

A:  Historically this country has had a military that was too small to defend us.  Look at the War of 1812, The Civil War, The Spanish-American War, WW1, WW2, The Korean Conflict, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, and even the War on Terror.  With the Persian Gulf we had to heavily depend on reservists and the National Guard.  We had to have a draft in most of the other wars because we were not prepared militarily. 

We can have a small government and a military large enough to defend us. 

Q.  This century how would you like the US government to look?

A.  The legislative side of government needs to stop being so partisan and work for the good of the country.  If you are for something it should not matter if someone from another party says they are for the same thing you are.  It makes no sense.  All Republicans are not conservative.  All democrats are not liberal.  There are conservative democrats. 

We can not be the world police.  We also can not sit idly by when injustices are done throughout the world.  It's a fine line to walk.  We haven't been perfect.  I believe we have done a good job. 

On the judicial side we need to stop narrowing the nominees for the Supreme Court to judges.  Judges aren't the only ones who are qualified to be on the Supreme Court.  Look at how we select Supreme Court justices.  The president nominates someone.  The president is not required to be a judge.  The Senate confirms the nomination.  Senators aren't required to be a judge.  Yet, they believe only judges should be nominated.  If you find someone with sound judgment, that is fair minded, and will be able to decide cases on the merits.  Not on a political ideology. 

The executive has to always show strength.  Take the current president.  He has consistently signed the order to kill the No. 2 Al Qaeda person.  He took out Bin Laden with intel from 2007.  We don't need a perceived pushover in the Oval Office.  We also don't need a bully either. 



These are very interesting statements Y, and for the most part fundamentally sound.

I do think the Supreme court might be a rather weak point. The justices, from what I gather of them, are there to be the fundamental voice of the United States legally. One can only get there by going to the best schools the US has to offer legally, and having the best teachers. These people are, for the most part, functionally the voice of our society. They should come from the best law schools, and they all do.

I do think lifetime appointments should be done away with though. Many become out of touch with the actual people they represent, which is also why I feel term limits should be put in place for the house. This would also help do away with the partisan side because there would less time for people to be there.

I think, to save itself, conservatism in the United States would do well enough in distancing themselves from the republican party and creating a new party which stands and supports it's ideals. I personally can never see a Mitt Romney or Rick Perry type ever winning a major election, but I can see a Jon Huntsman or Chris Christie winning and being marketable.

I dont necessarily believe Conservatism HAS to be synonymous with the bigotry and jingoism the republican party has devolved to....would you agree?
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on July 31, 2013, 01:06:11 PM
Neymar, going to the 'best' schools has nothing to do with being on the Supreme Court.  That is an elitist position to believe that.  There were non-judges that decided the Brown vs The Board of Education.  It is less likely to predict how the court will decide when you have non-judges.  For most of the cases you can pretty much predict how they will decide.  Mainly because the judges will not vary in their positions. 

One more thing on the government.  The U.S. Government has to stop the racist immigration practices.  In the 1800s when the Europeans came over in droves the government built processing centers.  The most famous being Ellis Island.  They were processed and they entered the country.

When brown skinned immigrants come to this country today the government puts up a fence.  The country needs to build processing centers similar to the Ellis Islands and have the immigrants go there.  They will be processed and allowed to enter the country.  Somebody needs to tell those people who want a fence the amount of people the Great Wall of China kept out.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: uchighlander on July 31, 2013, 02:03:36 PM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: oldsport on July 31, 2013, 02:06:38 PM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

 :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod:
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on July 31, 2013, 07:03:59 PM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

 :clap: :clap: :clap:
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Bison66 on July 31, 2013, 10:52:24 PM
I think the broader questions that Neymar raised are more interesting, but....

Quote
....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken.

I gather that No Child Left Behind would be such a fed law? ? ?
O0
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: oldsport on August 01, 2013, 09:09:19 AM
I think the broader questions that Neymar raised are more interesting, but....

Quote
....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken.

I gather that No Child Left Behind would be such a fed law? ? ?
O0

I was not a supporter of No Child Left Behind.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on August 01, 2013, 10:00:14 AM
No Child Left Behind wasn't even good on paper.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: uchighlander on August 01, 2013, 10:19:09 AM
No Child Left Behind wasn't even good on paper.
Kinda like Obamacare. :lmao: GO VIKINGS!!!
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Neymar on August 01, 2013, 10:49:03 AM
Wouldnt letting states set up the education requirement promote inequality?

Surely more educated states would have higher standards, thus they would become more advanced.

This has already happened though, so I guess keeping the federal government out of schooling would be a rather fair concession.

What about other federal  agencies? Like TSA?
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: oldsport on August 01, 2013, 11:05:59 AM
No Child Left Behind wasn't even good on paper.
Kinda like Obamacare. :lmao: GO VIKINGS!!!

Exactly.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: FunCkMaster on August 01, 2013, 11:31:31 AM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

I think I get it. So when state/local school systems start to re-write HIStory in their textbooks and "lessen" the effects of some historical institutions which favored a certain majority of folks, they won't have the nosey folks from the nation's capital who know better telling them to stop spreading that poison to the kids who should know the real story...

Yeah, I get it....
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: oldsport on August 01, 2013, 11:35:50 AM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

I think I get it. So when state/local school systems start to re-write HIStory in their textbooks and "lessen" the effects of some historical institutions which favored a certain majority of folks, they won't have the nosey folks from the nation's capital who know better telling them to stop spreading that poison to the kids who should know the real story...

Yeah, I get it....

Sounds like you want things to be like they were in Nazi Germany. By the way, liberal (socialists/communists) poison revisionist (lying) history is already being spread to kids in most public schools as well as American Universities and Colleges.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: FunCkMaster on August 01, 2013, 11:37:57 AM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

I think I get it. So when state/local school systems start to re-write HIStory in their textbooks and "lessen" the effects of some historical institutions which favored a certain majority of folks, they won't have the nosey folks from the nation's capital who know better telling them to stop spreading that poison to the kids who should know the real story...

Yeah, I get it....

Sounds like you want things to be like they were in Nazi Germany. By the way, liberal (socialists/communists) poison revisionist (lying) history is already being spread to kids in most public schools as well as American Universities and Colleges.

Difference.

Nazi Germany spread false info.

In the instance I presented, the gov't would be blowing the whistle on false info.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on August 01, 2013, 11:45:12 AM
Funck, the electorate of each state will have make sure the truth is told in history class.  The democrats had a coup d'etat in 1898.  They will only want the history books to say that the democrats became the majority that year.  Not how.  Not how they disenfranchised Blacks.  They will never allow it.  At best Black North Carolinians know about the Wilmington Riots of 1898.  What they don't know is that it was also statewide.  

The feds aren't going to help teach the truth.  
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: CU1994 on August 01, 2013, 12:16:59 PM
From an educational point if view, all the top tier countries have strong national standards.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on August 01, 2013, 01:03:01 PM
From an educational point if view, all the top tier countries have strong national standards.

They also don't have separate local standards.  That was the problem with No Child Left Behind.  A school could do great on the local level and fail No Child Left Behind or vice versa.  It made no sense. 
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: CU1994 on August 01, 2013, 01:07:34 PM
From an educational point if view, all the top tier countries have strong national standards.

They also don't have separate local standards.  That was the problem with No Child Left Behind.  A school could do great on the local level and fail No Child Left Behind or vice versa.  It made no sense. 

That's the purpose of the common core. You can have your local stuff but there should be a national standard.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: y04185 on August 01, 2013, 02:11:36 PM
From an educational point if view, all the top tier countries have strong national standards.

They also don't have separate local standards.  That was the problem with No Child Left Behind.  A school could do great on the local level and fail No Child Left Behind or vice versa.  It made no sense. 

That's the purpose of the common core. You can have your local stuff but there should be a national standard.

No Child Left Behind should have been the standard for the common core.  And left room for local stuff.  The problem is it didn't allow for that.  Yet, they allowed the locals to have their own standards.  The local and the feds clashed.  No Child Left Behind should have put the federal foot down and withheld funds if they didn't walk the federal line.  The whole thing was wishy washy from the beginning. 
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: CU1994 on August 01, 2013, 02:17:01 PM
From an educational point if view, all the top tier countries have strong national standards.

They also don't have separate local standards.  That was the problem with No Child Left Behind.  A school could do great on the local level and fail No Child Left Behind or vice versa.  It made no sense. 

That's the purpose of the common core. You can have your local stuff but there should be a national standard.

No Child Left Behind should have been the standard for the common core.  And left room for local stuff.  The problem is it didn't allow for that.  Yet, they allowed the locals to have their own standards.  The local and the feds clashed.  No Child Left Behind should have put the federal foot down and withheld funds if they didn't walk the federal line.  The whole thing was wishy washy from the beginning. 

That's a good point but NCLB wasn't about standards, it was just about outcomes. I think NCLB attempted to please everyone. You set the goal but how you get there is up to you.
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: uchighlander on August 01, 2013, 04:07:51 PM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

I think I get it. So when state/local school systems start to re-write HIStory in their textbooks and "lessen" the effects of some historical institutions which favored a certain majority of folks, they won't have the nosey folks from the nation's capital who know better telling them to stop spreading that poison to the kids who should know the real story...

Yeah, I get it....
Most of the revisonist history that I've heard about doesn't show America in the best light so what are you trying to say? GO VIKINGS!!!
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Bison66 on August 02, 2013, 03:49:41 PM
I think the broader questions that Neymar raised are more interesting, but....

Quote
....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken.

I gather that No Child Left Behind would be such a fed law? ? ?
O0

I was not a supporter of No Child Left Behind.

Which begs the question:

When you claimed on this board that YOU were not as loyal to Bush as Obama supporters are now to Obama and that you and others raised concerns, WAS "NO CHILD" one of the concerns you raised?

Never mind because the answer is NO!
O0
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: uchighlander on August 02, 2013, 05:58:59 PM
I think the broader questions that Neymar raised are more interesting, but....

Quote
....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken.

I gather that No Child Left Behind would be such a fed law? ? ?
O0

I was not a supporter of No Child Left Behind.

Which begs the question:

When you claimed on this board that YOU were not as loyal to Bush as Obama supporters are now to Obama and that you and others raised concerns, WAS "NO CHILD" one of the concerns you raised?

Never mind because the answer is NO!
O0
As far as I'm concerned that was small potatoes considering everything else that was going on......plus I am very fortunate to live in one of the best school districts in the state of California. No Child has ever been a factor. GO VIKINGS!!!
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Bison66 on August 03, 2013, 11:36:03 PM
I think the broader questions that Neymar raised are more interesting, but....

Quote
....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken.

I gather that No Child Left Behind would be such a fed law? ? ?
O0

I was not a supporter of No Child Left Behind.

Which begs the question:

When you claimed on this board that YOU were not as loyal to Bush as Obama supporters are now to Obama and that you and others raised concerns, WAS "NO CHILD" one of the concerns you raised?

Never mind because the answer is NO!
O0
As far as I'm concerned that was small potatoes considering everything else that was going on......plus I am very fortunate to live in one of the best school districts in the state of California. No Child has ever been a factor. GO VIKINGS!!!
uchi, thanks for your comment.

I was actually talking to OS, however.  I didn't have the pleasure of knowing you during those years.

OS claimed that he had voiced concerns or opposition to Bush policies, but it didn't happen.  Not on the boards where many of us interacted with him during those years.  Didn't happen.  Just more of his revisionist BS.

That was the point I was making.
O0
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: FunCkMaster on August 04, 2013, 11:56:57 PM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

I think I get it. So when state/local school systems start to re-write HIStory in their textbooks and "lessen" the effects of some historical institutions which favored a certain majority of folks, they won't have the nosey folks from the nation's capital who know better telling them to stop spreading that poison to the kids who should know the real story...

Yeah, I get it....
Most of the revisonist history that I've heard about doesn't show America in the best light so what are you trying to say? GO VIKINGS!!!

What you meant is, the actual non "white-washed" history doesn't show America in the best light at times. Truth is.... Historically, America had achieved greatness in many facets. And , America has showed it's way less than perfect side in the annals of history.

That is not what I am TRYING to say. That is what I am SAYING...
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: uchighlander on August 05, 2013, 10:35:53 AM
I'm basically on board with Y and OS. I think educational standards should be set at the local level....the feds should never be involved unless a fed law is broken. People at the local level know what's needed in their schools a lot more than DC does.....that's why we have school boards. GO VIKINGS!!!

I think I get it. So when state/local school systems start to re-write HIStory in their textbooks and "lessen" the effects of some historical institutions which favored a certain majority of folks, they won't have the nosey folks from the nation's capital who know better telling them to stop spreading that poison to the kids who should know the real story...

Yeah, I get it....
Most of the revisonist history that I've heard about doesn't show America in the best light so what are you trying to say? GO VIKINGS!!!

What you meant is, the actual non "white-washed" history doesn't show America in the best light at times. Truth is.... Historically, America had achieved greatness in many facets. And , America has showed it's way less than perfect side in the annals of history.

That is not what I am TRYING to say. That is what I am SAYING...
I guess it depends on who's doing the re-writing.....liberal or conservative. GO VIKINGS!!!
Title: Re: Y,Oldsport,Uchi. A discussion on conservatism
Post by: Meciber 202 on August 06, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
bump