Jump to content

Is Auburn A Conservative School?


Proud Tiger

Recommended Posts

It means absolutely nothing to me. Conservative and liberal are two terms that have been swapped around between the two ideological camps so much that they are virtually meaningless.

I think I'm going to start referring to myself as a Bourbon Democrat and see how many confused looks I get.

Wow, i had given up even trying to get people to see that. The two sides have shifted sides so many times, they are really completely misnamed etc.

Well, I totally disagree. There is a Washington elitist political class that definitely includes both democrats and republicans. There is no doubt about that however, there is a legitimate difference between conservatives and liberals the most obvious of which is a reverence for the Constitution. That's why the Tea Party had so much appeal. A helluva lot of people are tired of career politicians of both parties inside the Washington bubble simply going along to get along. Consequently, tons of money has been spent by establishment republicans to defeat Tea Party candidates - they dont want anyone outing their charade.

The funny thing is, a lot people complain about the parties being interchangeable but when someone with true conservative ideals expresses them those same folks are among some of the first to call them crazy right wing loons. Seems ironic to me buts that just me I guess.

Feaux reverence, by and large. Conservatives love the 2nd, offer conditional support for the 1st, and couldn't care less about the "crimnul coddlin' 4th-7th Amendments. Liberals and conservatives swap places vis a vis support for the 9th and 10th Amendments according to who enjoys a majority in D.C. The same goes for executive power.

Until we collectively decide that the Constitution and Bill of Rights means what it says no matter which party or ideology is wielding power, its not worth the paper its written on. A house divided, and all that.

Correction..as long as we have a Commander in Chief who only selectively enforces the law and routinely ignores the parts of the Constitution that don't fit his agenda its not worth the paper its written on. By the way, my reference to the constitution was less about individual amendments and more about honoring the Constitutionally delegated powers of 3 co-equal branches of government instead of constantly trying to subvert it the way this Pres does. Listen, Im not the only one who sees this. Jonathon Turly, a Constitutional scholar and law school professor, feels very strongly that Obama could be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors in his persistent end runs on Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





It means absolutely nothing to me. Conservative and liberal are two terms that have been swapped around between the two ideological camps so much that they are virtually meaningless.

I think I'm going to start referring to myself as a Bourbon Democrat and see how many confused looks I get.

Wow, i had given up even trying to get people to see that. The two sides have shifted sides so many times, they are really completely misnamed etc.

Well, I totally disagree. There is a Washington elitist political class that definitely includes both democrats and republicans. There is no doubt about that however, there is a legitimate difference between conservatives and liberals the most obvious of which is a reverence for the Constitution. That's why the Tea Party had so much appeal. A helluva lot of people are tired of career politicians of both parties inside the Washington bubble simply going along to get along. Consequently, tons of money has been spent by establishment republicans to defeat Tea Party candidates - they dont want anyone outing their charade.

The funny thing is, a lot people complain about the parties being interchangeable but when someone with true conservative ideals expresses them those same folks are among some of the first to call them crazy right wing loons. Seems ironic to me buts that just me I guess.

Feaux reverence, by and large. Conservatives love the 2nd, offer conditional support for the 1st, and couldn't care less about the "crimnul coddlin' 4th-7th Amendments. Liberals and conservatives swap places vis a vis support for the 9th and 10th Amendments according to who enjoys a majority in D.C. The same goes for executive power.

Until we collectively decide that the Constitution and Bill of Rights means what it says no matter which party or ideology is wielding power, its not worth the paper its written on. A house divided, and all that.

Correction..as long as we have a Commander in Chief who only selectively enforces the law and routinely ignores the parts of the Constitution that don't fit his agenda its not worth the paper its written on. By the way, my reference to the constitution was less about individual amendments and more about honoring the Constitutionally delegated powers of 3 co-equal branches of government instead of constantly trying to subvert it the way this Pres does. Listen, Im not the only one who sees this. Jonathon Turly, a Constitutional scholar and law school professor, feels very strongly that Obama could be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors in his persistent end runs on Congress.

Agreed. I'm not an Obama defender, just not oblivious to the fact that the end runs, hubris, treating Congress like a potted plant and the death of the co-equal branches aren't a new phenomenon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It means absolutely nothing to me. Conservative and liberal are two terms that have been swapped around between the two ideological camps so much that they are virtually meaningless.

I think I'm going to start referring to myself as a Bourbon Democrat and see how many confused looks I get.

Wow, i had given up even trying to get people to see that. The two sides have shifted sides so many times, they are really completely misnamed etc.

Well, I totally disagree. There is a Washington elitist political class that definitely includes both democrats and republicans. There is no doubt about that however, there is a legitimate difference between conservatives and liberals the most obvious of which is a reverence for the Constitution. That's why the Tea Party had so much appeal. A helluva lot of people are tired of career politicians of both parties inside the Washington bubble simply going along to get along. Consequently, tons of money has been spent by establishment republicans to defeat Tea Party candidates - they dont want anyone outing their charade.

The funny thing is, a lot people complain about the parties being interchangeable but when someone with true conservative ideals expresses them those same folks are among some of the first to call them crazy right wing loons. Seems ironic to me buts that just me I guess.

Feaux reverence, by and large. Conservatives love the 2nd, offer conditional support for the 1st, and couldn't care less about the "crimnul coddlin' 4th-7th Amendments. Liberals and conservatives swap places vis a vis support for the 9th and 10th Amendments according to who enjoys a majority in D.C. The same goes for executive power.

Until we collectively decide that the Constitution and Bill of Rights means what it says no matter which party or ideology is wielding power, its not worth the paper its written on. A house divided, and all that.

Correction..as long as we have a Commander in Chief who only selectively enforces the law and routinely ignores the parts of the Constitution that don't fit his agenda its not worth the paper its written on. By the way, my reference to the constitution was less about individual amendments and more about honoring the Constitutionally delegated powers of 3 co-equal branches of government instead of constantly trying to subvert it the way this Pres does. Listen, Im not the only one who sees this. Jonathon Turly, a Constitutional scholar and law school professor, feels very strongly that Obama could be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors in his persistent end runs on Congress.

Agreed. I'm not an Obama defender, just not oblivious to the fact that the end runs, hubris, treating Congress like a potted plant and the death of the co-equal branches aren't a new phenomenon.

Of course not. it was started by Woodrow Wilson the first real progressive President and it was continued by FDR. Obama, however, has been more aggressive and taken that to a level not seen in decades and it will have a backlash. When it comes down to choosing government or individual liberty in this country it always does..Having a disdain for the Constitution is part and parcel of trying to implement the elusive utopian state the social justice warriors continue to promise their constituents. It will never happen...ever, because it requires stepping all over the Constitution and individuals' liberties in the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow Wilson the first progressive President? I suppose Teddy Roosevelt doesn't count?

Woodrow Wilson was hardly progressive. He was a more of a puppet. It is contended by some historians that Wilson's path to the White House was paved by elites who favored the income tax and formation of the Federal Reserve System and, engineered by the Republican leader in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich. It can also be argued that the ties between the Rockefeller family and Aldrich family are an early example of the overt unification of political and economic power.

I can understand so-called "conservatives" demonizing the word liberal. However, reasons for demonizing the word progressive, escape me. Progressive politicians have typically stood against "corporatism" and, have favored democracy over plutocracy.

Anyhow, the point is, in their desire to demonize all things to the political left, the political right has embraced a far bigger threat to liberty, democracy, and the Constitution, the takeover of our political system and government by corporate American and the 400 families who own the vast majority of their stock. They have become so extreme that, they now believe the words "fair" and "equality" represent something evil. They conveniently forget that both words play a big part in the concept of "American Exceptionalism". Are the majority (maybe just the most vocal) of today's "conservatives" corrupt or, are they simply useful idiots who will digest and regurgitate the phony talking points and narratives of their talk radio heroes?

The Constitution is an organic document. Ultimately, the people of this country are entrusted with defending it. It is time for the American people to realize that their loyalty should be to the country and not a party. Their faith should rest with the principles of God, the Constitution and, respect for democracy, not convenient ideologies of political figures or the personal views of dogmatic religious ones, The people of this country ARE the government, not the politicians. The big power on both the left and right are concerned with just that, their power, NOT the best interests of the majority of Americans.

I would never pretend to tell any of you how to vote but,,,,,,,,,,,,if America is ever going to win, all of us may have to think about voting for the person who "has no chance of winning".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow Wilson the first progressive President? I suppose Teddy Roosevelt doesn't count?

Woodrow Wilson was hardly progressive. He was a more of a puppet. It is contended by some historians that Wilson's path to the White House was paved by elites who favored the income tax and formation of the Federal Reserve System and, engineered by the Republican leader in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich. It can also be argued that the ties between the Rockefeller family and Aldrich family are an early example of the overt unification of political and economic power.

I can understand so-called "conservatives" demonizing the word liberal. However, reasons for demonizing the word progressive, escape me. Progressive politicians have typically stood against "corporatism" and, have favored democracy over plutocracy.

Anyhow, the point is, in their desire to demonize all things to the political left, the political right has embraced a far bigger threat to liberty, democracy, and the Constitution, the takeover of our political system and government by corporate American and the 400 families who own the vast majority of their stock. They have become so extreme that, they now believe the words "fair" and "equality" represent something evil. They conveniently forget that both words play a big part in the concept of "American Exceptionalism". Are the majority (maybe just the most vocal) of today's "conservatives" corrupt or, are they simply useful idiots who will digest and regurgitate the phony talking points and narratives of their talk radio heroes?

The Constitution is an organic document. Ultimately, the people of this country are entrusted with defending it. It is time for the American people to realize that their loyalty should be to the country and not a party. Their faith should rest with the principles of God, the Constitution and, respect for democracy, not convenient ideologies of political figures or the personal views of dogmatic religious ones, The people of this country ARE the government, not the politicians. The big power on both the left and right are concerned with just that, their power, NOT the best interests of the majority of Americans.

I would never pretend to tell any of you how to vote but,,,,,,,,,,,,if America is ever going to win, all of us may have to think about voting for the person who "has no chance of winning".

Well stated! :bow:

And that is why the ("conservative"-supported) 'Citizens United' ruling represents such a threat to our future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow Wilson the first progressive President? I suppose Teddy Roosevelt doesn't count?

Woodrow Wilson was hardly progressive. He was a more of a puppet. It is contended by some historians that Wilson's path to the White House was paved by elites who favored the income tax and formation of the Federal Reserve System and, engineered by the Republican leader in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich. It can also be argued that the ties between the Rockefeller family and Aldrich family are an early example of the overt unification of political and economic power.

I can understand so-called "conservatives" demonizing the word liberal. However, reasons for demonizing the word progressive, escape me. Progressive politicians have typically stood against "corporatism" and, have favored democracy over plutocracy.

Anyhow, the point is, in their desire to demonize all things to the political left, the political right has embraced a far bigger threat to liberty, democracy, and the Constitution, the takeover of our political system and government by corporate American and the 400 families who own the vast majority of their stock. They have become so extreme that, they now believe the words "fair" and "equality" represent something evil. They conveniently forget that both words play a big part in the concept of "American Exceptionalism". Are the majority (maybe just the most vocal) of today's "conservatives" corrupt or, are they simply useful idiots who will digest and regurgitate the phony talking points and narratives of their talk radio heroes?

The Constitution is an organic document. Ultimately, the people of this country are entrusted with defending it. It is time for the American people to realize that their loyalty should be to the country and not a party. Their faith should rest with the principles of God, the Constitution and, respect for democracy, not convenient ideologies of political figures or the personal views of dogmatic religious ones, The people of this country ARE the government, not the politicians. The big power on both the left and right are concerned with just that, their power, NOT the best interests of the majority of Americans.

I would never pretend to tell any of you how to vote but,,,,,,,,,,,,if America is ever going to win, all of us may have to think about voting for the person who "has no chance of winning".

Well stated! :bow:

And that is why the ("conservative"-supported) 'Citizens United' ruling represents such a threat to our future.

Agreed. One person, one vote is democracy. One dollar, one vote is at best plutocracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow Wilson the first progressive President? I suppose Teddy Roosevelt doesn't count?

Woodrow Wilson was hardly progressive. He was a more of a puppet. It is contended by some historians that Wilson's path to the White House was paved by elites who favored the income tax and formation of the Federal Reserve System and, engineered by the Republican leader in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich. It can also be argued that the ties between the Rockefeller family and Aldrich family are an early example of the overt unification of political and economic power.

I can understand so-called "conservatives" demonizing the word liberal. However, reasons for demonizing the word progressive, escape me. Progressive politicians have typically stood against "corporatism" and, have favored democracy over plutocracy.

Anyhow, the point is, in their desire to demonize all things to the political left, the political right has embraced a far bigger threat to liberty, democracy, and the Constitution, the takeover of our political system and government by corporate American and the 400 families who own the vast majority of their stock. They have become so extreme that, they now believe the words "fair" and "equality" represent something evil. They conveniently forget that both words play a big part in the concept of "American Exceptionalism". Are the majority (maybe just the most vocal) of today's "conservatives" corrupt or, are they simply useful idiots who will digest and regurgitate the phony talking points and narratives of their talk radio heroes?

The Constitution is an organic document. Ultimately, the people of this country are entrusted with defending it. It is time for the American people to realize that their loyalty should be to the country and not a party. Their faith should rest with the principles of God, the Constitution and, respect for democracy, not convenient ideologies of political figures or the personal views of dogmatic religious ones, The people of this country ARE the government, not the politicians. The big power on both the left and right are concerned with just that, their power, NOT the best interests of the majority of Americans.

I would never pretend to tell any of you how to vote but,,,,,,,,,,,,if America is ever going to win, all of us may have to think about voting for the person who "has no chance of winning".

Well stated! :bow:

And that is why the ("conservative"-supported) 'Citizens United' ruling represents such a threat to our future.

Agreed. One person, one vote is democracy. One dollar, one vote is at best plutocracy.

:thumbsup:

Now, if we are going to complain about Koch etc money, we must also complain about Soros and Steyer money too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow Wilson the first progressive President? I suppose Teddy Roosevelt doesn't count?

Woodrow Wilson was hardly progressive. He was a more of a puppet. It is contended by some historians that Wilson's path to the White House was paved by elites who favored the income tax and formation of the Federal Reserve System and, engineered by the Republican leader in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich. It can also be argued that the ties between the Rockefeller family and Aldrich family are an early example of the overt unification of political and economic power.

I can understand so-called "conservatives" demonizing the word liberal. However, reasons for demonizing the word progressive, escape me. Progressive politicians have typically stood against "corporatism" and, have favored democracy over plutocracy.

Anyhow, the point is, in their desire to demonize all things to the political left, the political right has embraced a far bigger threat to liberty, democracy, and the Constitution, the takeover of our political system and government by corporate American and the 400 families who own the vast majority of their stock. They have become so extreme that, they now believe the words "fair" and "equality" represent something evil. They conveniently forget that both words play a big part in the concept of "American Exceptionalism". Are the majority (maybe just the most vocal) of today's "conservatives" corrupt or, are they simply useful idiots who will digest and regurgitate the phony talking points and narratives of their talk radio heroes?

The Constitution is an organic document. Ultimately, the people of this country are entrusted with defending it. It is time for the American people to realize that their loyalty should be to the country and not a party. Their faith should rest with the principles of God, the Constitution and, respect for democracy, not convenient ideologies of political figures or the personal views of dogmatic religious ones, The people of this country ARE the government, not the politicians. The big power on both the left and right are concerned with just that, their power, NOT the best interests of the majority of Americans.

I would never pretend to tell any of you how to vote but,,,,,,,,,,,,if America is ever going to win, all of us may have to think about voting for the person who "has no chance of winning".

Well stated! :bow:

And that is why the ("conservative"-supported) 'Citizens United' ruling represents such a threat to our future.

Agreed. One person, one vote is democracy. One dollar, one vote is at best plutocracy.

Dollars don't vote, people do. George Soros can spend as much as he wants to but he can't buy my vote. Money votes for choice in products. Money can vote for Taylor Swift or Katy Perry. Unfortunately money can buy politicians and has most of of congress purchased. Citizens United never affected corrupt politicians. It gave corporations equal footing with big labor which is why Democrats hate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodrow Wilson the first progressive President? I suppose Teddy Roosevelt doesn't count?

Woodrow Wilson was hardly progressive. He was a more of a puppet. It is contended by some historians that Wilson's path to the White House was paved by elites who favored the income tax and formation of the Federal Reserve System and, engineered by the Republican leader in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich. It can also be argued that the ties between the Rockefeller family and Aldrich family are an early example of the overt unification of political and economic power.

I can understand so-called "conservatives" demonizing the word liberal. However, reasons for demonizing the word progressive, escape me. Progressive politicians have typically stood against "corporatism" and, have favored democracy over plutocracy.

Anyhow, the point is, in their desire to demonize all things to the political left, the political right has embraced a far bigger threat to liberty, democracy, and the Constitution, the takeover of our political system and government by corporate American and the 400 families who own the vast majority of their stock. They have become so extreme that, they now believe the words "fair" and "equality" represent something evil. They conveniently forget that both words play a big part in the concept of "American Exceptionalism". Are the majority (maybe just the most vocal) of today's "conservatives" corrupt or, are they simply useful idiots who will digest and regurgitate the phony talking points and narratives of their talk radio heroes?

The Constitution is an organic document. Ultimately, the people of this country are entrusted with defending it. It is time for the American people to realize that their loyalty should be to the country and not a party. Their faith should rest with the principles of God, the Constitution and, respect for democracy, not convenient ideologies of political figures or the personal views of dogmatic religious ones, The people of this country ARE the government, not the politicians. The big power on both the left and right are concerned with just that, their power, NOT the best interests of the majority of Americans.

I would never pretend to tell any of you how to vote but,,,,,,,,,,,,if America is ever going to win, all of us may have to think about voting for the person who "has no chance of winning".

Well stated! :bow:/>

And that is why the ("conservative"-supported) 'Citizens United' ruling represents such a threat to our future.

Agreed. One person, one vote is democracy. One dollar, one vote is at best plutocracy.

Dollars don't vote, people do. George Soros can spend as much as he wants to but he can't buy my vote. Money votes for choice in products. Money can vote for Taylor Swift or Katy Perry. Unfortunately money can buy politicians and has most of of congress purchased. Citizens United never affected corrupt politicians. It gave corporations equal footing with big labor which is why Democrats hate it.

It's also why they hate laws that eliminate automatic dues withholding and mandatory union membershio.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...