In Honor of CPAC, Here’s Why Being a Conservative is so Terrible

ted-cruz-cpacI’ve never quite understood why anyone would brag about being a conservative.  To me, being a conservative means you’re afraid of change, you oppose that which is different and you resist progress.  These people tend to long for the “good ol’ days” and staunchly oppose almost anything different.

This is how the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines conservative:

Conservative: believing in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society; not liking or accepting changes or new ideas.

Now, tell me, how could a society ever advance if all they ever did was value “tradition” while “not liking or accepting changes or new ideas”?

I hate to break it to these conservatives, but this nation was founded because our Founding Fathers opposed “tradition” and embraced “change and new ideas.”

Slavery was ended because we opposed “tradition.”  Women were given the right to vote because we ushered in “new ideas.”  Segregation was ended and civil rights laws were passed because most of us didn’t fear “change.”

Things like the automobile, flight, space travel, sending a man to the moon, computers, the internet, smartphones – these are all things that were brought to you by people who bucked “tradition.”  People who embraced change.  Individuals who were always open to new, better ideas.

You know, the exact opposite of what it means to be a conservative.

So, why in the hell would anyone want to be a conservative?  The resistance to change, and longing for the “good ol’ days,” are probably the reasons why most conservatives are older.  It’s why the Republican party has such a hard time attracting young voters.  It’s probably why there’s an indisputable correlation between those who are often less educated and those who are more likely to be conservative.

As former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum once said, “We will never have the elite, smart people on our side.”

That’s not saying that all educated people are liberals, but stats often show that the majority of those with a college education often tend to be liberals while those who have a high school education or less are often conservative.

I just don’t get why anyone would want to call themselves a “conservative.”  To me, that’s essentially bragging that you’re afraid of change, oppose progress and don’t value education.  Because those values are found in the majority of conservatives.

And “conservative values” sure as heck didn’t found this nation – liberal ones did.  Our Founding Fathers sought change, ignored tradition and forged new ideas.  You know, the complete opposite of what conservative ideology stands for.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Jim Bean

    Being conservative does not mean you are afraid of change. It simply means you are a afraid of taking reckless risks and are old enough to recognize one when you see it.

    • Keith Kowalski

      like invading countries?

      • Jim Bean

        You are referring to D-day, I assume? (Unless you reply in German, I’ll assume not.)

      • Gary Menten

        False equivalency

        D-Day…WWII, Franklin Roosevelt in the White House. Liberal Democrat. War forced upon US.
        Is their any part of this you don’t understand?

        Also, and perhaps you don’t understand the difference, but France was an ally of the US in WWII, with a government in exile and Free French Forces were part of the invasion forces on D-Day. Allied forces invaded France with the full blessing of said government and the French people in order to liberate it from a foreign occupier.

      • Pipercat

        Pish, details…………..

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        jimbo is temulent with copious amounts of breakfast scotch

      • Edward Krebbs

        I just love the way you jump over the last 70 years to find an invasion you like while totally forgetting the more obvious meaning of the commenter and invasions which are still crippling the USA such as Iraq. Totally destroys any credibility in what you say.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        ” credibility”???
        that’s like saying john holmes was a Hollywood actor

      • Gary Menten

        Or Roddy Piper.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        hey!! that movie he did with keith david about the weird sunglasses was kinda cool!!

      • Jim Bean

        I replied to keith kawalski’s comment which reads ‘like invading countries?’ That infers he’s in opposition to ALL invasions of ALL countries. I suspected he was being disingenuous – as are you.

      • Guest

        Don’t try to weasel out. You know damned well he was referring to the invasion of Iraq.

      • Gary Menten

        Don’t try to weasel out of it. You know damned well he was referring to the invasion of Iraq.

      • Jim Bean

        I admit I suspected he was applying extremely selective ethics. OK. I admitted it. Happy now?

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        jimbo was seriously temulent while we ( bush/cheney duet) went into Iraq and Afghanistan.
        ,,,,,,,,,,,, maybe : to jimbo that’s NOT a true ‘invasion’ as john wayne wasn’t there

    • Map-DORK

      to you guys , everything is a reckless risk

    • Pipercat

      What’s your, and your ilk’s, excuse?

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        jesus says so ( in the 21st century schizoid man bible)
        ,,,,,,,,,,OH: they hate all NON white NON heterosexual NON Baptist Christians who are not male
        ………I nearly forgot that

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        alcohol consumption and “testarudo” thinking

      • Pipercat

        Marron, what a cetriolo…

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        wouldn’t U jes’ LOVE to have an assembly of these cretins —just to see what they look like?

      • Pipercat

        I look for he f on their handle frame. One word describes most these guys. Unhealthy……..

      • moe/larry & curly keys


    • dicknystrom


    • Sandy Greer

      It’s a good thing conservatives weren’t in charge back in the day.

      Those reckless radicals would never have been able to gather enough support to lead a revolution against the English crown. Talk about your reckless risks! Their heads were on the line…

      But I couldn’t help but notice Jim Bean has rejected the ‘established, traditional’ Merriam-Webster definition of conservative. Is Jim Bean going rogue? Is he some closet radical, gonna take a reckless risk, now and then?

      Say it ain’t so, Jim Bean! Or they’ll be calling you a liberal before the decade is out. 😉

      • Jim Bean

        Yes, the Dems have the best plan for moving us forward as a unit. The unsuccessful vs the successful. The heathens vs. the Christians. Homosexuals vs. the Heterosexuals. Blacks vs Whites. Women vs. Whites. Young vs. old. Takers vs. the Makers. POTUS vs. established laws. Greenies vs. Industry. EPA vs. workers. Etc, etc. Can’t fail. One nation under God. Hallelujah.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        we (NON religious crybaby white trash) LIBERAL whites don’t feel threatened by gays or women or latinos or blacks– and its not the heathens that the pseudo Christians bitch about: they hate ALL who are NOT pentacostal Baptist Christians!
        takers VS makers?? the billionaires take more than they should ( see: offshore accounts/ no taxes paid/ lack of paying a living wage and benefits ETC) and they don’t give much– except to MORE billionaires and lobbyists.
        tea party trash proposals? PRAISE JEEEEESUS and stall progress.
        ” mr Boehner; where are the jobs”?

      • Gary Menten

        There is no conflict between those you describe as “heathen” and whom I describe as skeptics and the overwhelming majority of people who prefer to believe, albeit without any valid scientific evidence, that the universe was created by an all-powerful being who tallies the fall of every sparrow as opposed to the natural result of physical and natural laws that are the same everywhere. There is only a conflict between those of us who understand that freedom of religion is also freedom FROM religion and those who insist on trying to shove their (mostly Christian) religion down everyone’s throats.

        If there is any conflict between blacks and whites, and sometimes there is, it is usually the result white racism, and a history of hostility towards and repression of blacks.

        There is no conflict between the majority of straight and gay people. Whatever conflict there may be is entirely the product of bigotry, chiefly from the same, small narrow-minded segment of society that steadfastly believes without the least bit of scientific evidence that the universe was created by an all-powerful being in the sky who tallies the fall of every sparrow AND INSISTS ON FORCING THIS BELIEF DOWN EVERYONE ELSE’S THROAT.

        Now I’d love for you to explain why exactly the right to pollute the environment without restriction should be a “conservative” value or why Warren Buffet should be considered unsuccessful but I’m afraid I’d laugh myself nearly to death as I did when you made your D-Day comment.

        P.S. If the founding fathers had meant there be one nation under God, they would have surely written this into the constitution.

      • Jim Bean

        The founding fathers wrote the Constitution AFTER they created the Country via the Declaration of Independence which reads, in part, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. . .” (‘Self evident’ means only a fool would think otherwise and they presumed you weren’t one so they didn’t see a need to repeat it to you in the Constitution.) In the Constitution, they prohibited the government from telling you (like England had done) what religion you had to ascribe to. They didn’t guarantee you could go through life without ever being exposed to any aspect of it.

        – Everything in the world can be placed into two categories. Those created by man and those that weren’t. Considering the former, the greater leap of ‘faith’ is concluding that everything else is the result of a kazillion random coincidences.

        – Liberals promote religion incessantly when it comes to expecting others to share with them and treat them kindly and look out for them. Religion is the source of all those notions. The social rule in the animal kingdom is ‘the biggest and baddest eat first and eat best.’ Male grizzly bears kill baby grizzly bears just to bring the sow back in heat. Liberals are just fine with religion in government if its in the form of using government to enforce ‘love thy neighbor’ by taking something from someone else to share it with them.

        – Religion only becomes a problem for liberals when it attempts to promote responsible, civilized sexual behavior. Liberals want to have it both ways.

      • Gary Menten


        The Declaration of Independence is nice document doing just that: declaring independence from England, nothing more. It has no legal meaning whatsoever beyond this. The Constitution supersedes it as well as any other law.

        There is a difference between being exposed to religion–unavoidable in a country where 82% of the population considers prayer to be an important part of the their daily lives–and having it forced down your throat as fact by agents of the state such as the public school system. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled the latter to be unconstitutional. If it is forbidden to administer ANY religious test as a qualification for office, then it stand to reason that the state is neutral and that no one is required to ascribe to ANY religion whatsoever.

        So, to put it bluntly, some guy professing his faith on a street corner and passing out leaflets inviting you to join his church is okay. Nothing wrong with that; I’m free to accept one or totally ignore him. The state using the public school system to advance religion in NOT okay.

        As to leaps of faith. If place your faith in the idea that the universe is the creation supreme being for which no empirically gathered scientific data exists to support, then obviously any other explanation requires a leap of faith. If on the other hand you see “God” as Einstein and Spinoza did, which is the sum total of all the physical and natural laws of the universe, then clearly such an indifferent god does exist and it requires no leap of faith whatsoever to accept explanations for natural phenomena grounded in scientific theory. On the other hand it requires a rather huge leap of logic to accept that what is not man-made is the work of an intelligent, invisible super-being.

        The laws of physics and nature are not random; they are the same everywhere in the universe.

        There is nothing incompatible between being a liberal and being religious. The difference being that the liberal does not:

        A. shove his religion down everyone else’s throat and:
        B. When he brings up religion beliefs it’s usually as a counter-point to when some crackpot who thinks the bible (or other religious scripture) takes precedence of the the Constitution tries to promote this view.

        As to learning to share and having others look out for them, humans almost certainly learned in order to survive long before they developed notions of religion or how to read and write.

        It is also not your business to judge what “civilized sexual behavior” is or isn’t. That is a matter for consenting adults, period. If your religious beliefs dictate that you must conform to rules in sexual conduct, that’s fine. No liberal will ever take issue with this. By all means practice it to your heart’s delight. Only don’t think for a moment it gives you a right to tell anyone else how they have live their lives.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        civilized sexual behavior? hey scumbag– im straight and I know without a doubt that 95% of all sexual crimes in history are “heterosexual” in basis.
        care to try again?

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        ask him———–and all “conservatives” (SEE: regressives) what exactly they are ‘conserving’

    • moe/larry & curly keys

      such as………….?
      letting gays marry? raising minimum wage so the ones who GET that raise immediately spend it; thus stimulating economy? maybe legalizing weed ( and gambling and prostitution and ,,,,, ) which is here anyway: thus bringing more income to businesses and taxes and keeping money in America?
      or perhaps we should “conserve” ozzie and harriett” and keep REEEEE-LIGION as our political mantra???
      reckless risks? invading Iraq? not taxing billionaires? keeping stem cell research hidden? wasting BIG money TRYING–and failing- to remove the aca? or abortion?
      wow— I didn’t know conserving this crap was so good for (white trash regressive) America!

  • Keith Davis

    Jim Beam, you’re drunk old man. Go home.

    • moe/larry & curly keys

      he does love his bottle

  • Gary Menten

    CPAC: Committee for Perpetuating American Craziness.

  • Carol Lynn

    Slavery was ended because we opposed “tradition.” Women were given the right to vote because we ushered in “new ideas.” Segregation was ended and civil rights laws were passed because most of us didn’t fear “change.” f

    But…. but… for a lot of conservatives those things are *still* not good ideas. They long for the days they could enslave people, when women and ‘others’ were not uppity, and laws favored only them and their viewpoints.

    • naviathan

      Read a history book (and not a Common Core one). Conservatives fought against slavery. Democrats founded the KKK. Miriam Websters is a liberal publication so of course their definition of conservatism is going to be skewed. Being a conservative means standing for the morals, principals and values that the country was founded on. It means upholding both the freedoms and restrictions laid out in our constitution. It means moving forward with a mind to our surroundings and not jumping to conclusions and bulldozing a path at all costs. Just because Republican politicians aren’t upholding their oaths or our beliefs doesn’t mean that being a conservative is what they are. Conservatism isn’t holding anything back. Ignorant people that believe dribble like this are what’s holding us back.

      • Carol Lynn

        LOL – possibly you are the one who needs to read some actual history. The Republicans of the Civil War era were the more liberal of the two parties but, in case it has escaped your notice, the parties have switched positions over the years. I am rather partial to voting for politicians who support my *current* values than give lip service to some party name of 150 years ago and demand that everyone should ignore both the actual history that has happened since and the voting records of the current crop of Republicans and conservatives. It is a quite a giggle to learn that “conservatives fought against slavery.” Can you name one and tell me why you consider that person to be a conservative?

      • naviathan

        It blows me away every time a liberal says the parties switched sides. How does that make any sense at all? That’s like saying over the last 150 years we started calling men women and women men…The parties never switched sides, Democrats started playing both sides of the party line to attempt to discredit the Republican party. It’s been a slow effort that so far has only taken hold in the most ignorant and most unrealistic minds. Even though the other side doesn’t seem to want to admit it, Republicans aren’t the only conservatives. Being conservative is not a bad thing as is suggested here, neither does it mean any of what you ignorant dolts seem to believe. That’s like saying all Christians believe the Earth is only 4,000 years old. Believe it or not, we can have morals, religion and a brain. They’re not mutually exclusive. Being conservative doesn’t mean you don’t believe in progress or moving forward. It means you believe in doing so with a mind to the past to guide the future.

      • Carol Lynn

        Aha, I get it! You’re one of those who believe the “Southern Strategy” was just a way for those real states rights individualists – no coded words here! – to join like minded people who shared their vision for America. Even though the Republicans admittedly got into bed with some horrible, racist, nasty people at the time, back in the 50s, 60s and 70s, that the Democratic party was starting to welcome in people of color and standing for more inclusiveness and civil rights for everyone, the admitted racists and bigots were only welcomed into the Republican party because they all had a much greater similarity with the true conservatives… the rugged, states rights individualists who use the past to guide the future. You know them – the states rights (states have the right to not follow federal laws when they allow more civil rights than the conservatives like – oh and let’s gerrymander the districts and impose voting restrictions to favor our side), small government (unless it’s regulating women or marriage, then bring on the vaginal ultrasounds and the morality police!), moral (for a very limited specific set of theocratic-based rules), Bible-wielding (because, however much lip-service is given to the Constitution, the Bible is far more important) individuals (I’ve got mine, screw you! If you don’t like it, just stop being poor.) er… Yep. Sounds like a pretty standard conservative to me. What was your point again? However much you deny that the Republicans have become the party where racists and other bigots are still welcomed, I can look around and see it. That blacks were made to be slaves because of the curse of Ham, women are best off being ‘help meets’ to men because they naturally belong in the kitchen and making babies, and that how you’ve interpreted your old book’s supposed definition of marriage is the one that needs to be legislated because it is is obviously the correct one that needs to be used to guide the nation forward – that’s all impossible for a conservative to advocate. Except that they do. If those are not True Conservatives™ in your view, why don’t you make them unwelcome in your party instead of letting them control the agenda?

      • naviathan

        Again, I’m not a damned Republican. You talk about “allowing” people in a party as though anyone really has an overall say in who is in and who is out. I could stand here and say I’m a Democrat, but that doesn’t make me one. Even so, I’m a conservative, I’m not a Republican, I’m not a Racist, I’m not an evangelic radical, I’m not any of the stereotypes you wield against me or others like me. I’m a Constitutionalist, I’m a Libertarian, I’m a believer in Christ and his word, I accept all people regardless of race, religion, color or creed. The old stereotypes liberals love to throw around about conservatives are ridiculous and no way true about present day conservatives. Are there people who still exist in these stereotypes, yes. There are also people who still use outhouses and don’t have any running water. As for marriage, what the LGBT movement wants is equality. They want the same rights under the law as everyone else. That’s fine, but don’t call it marriage. This something I and many others have believed for a long time. The government document that says I’m married to my wife has nothing to do with my religion. It’s simply a legal agreement and shouldn’t be called a marriage license. Call it partnership agreement, couples license, whatever, just don’t take my religious beliefs and turn them into something my religion doesn’t approve of. Every group has their extremists, but don’t mark us all for the faults of a few. I could on all day with regard to the garbage you’ve regurgitated here. You want perfect examples of bigotry? Look around in this comments thread and you’ll find lots of it.

      • Carol Lynn

        I notice you still haven’t come up with a name of a conservative who was also an abolitionist…

        It’s just obvious to you! It is your Biblical right to define marriage for everyone else and anyone who says otherwise is taking away your rights to define marriage because it’s obvious you have a Biblical, god-given right to define it the way you want to, so we all have to give you, you personally the exclusive right to do it because you assert you have the god-given right to do it! You’ve done it a long time – and that means it’s obviously true you have the god-given right to do it forever and ever, amen! It’s written in the Bible. God said it. That settles it! Or your rights are being trampled by us bigots!

        Except it doesn’t and you don’t and they are not …. (do you even see the circularity of your argument?)

        The argument, “just don’t take my religious beliefs and turn them into something my religion doesn’t approve of” is total bullshit. How does using the common name – marriage – for a legal commitment that is exactly the same regardless of the gender of the participants change the legal commitment itself into something you do not approve of -especially when you admit you approve of the legal commitment as long as it is under a different name? (or were you dissembling about that part so as not to seem bigoted for the purposes of this conversation? It’s so hard to tell.)

        You do realize that no church has to perform a “marriage” ceremony for anyone they don’t want to, right? That if you don’t like it, you don’t have to do it or even approve of it. You will have to put up with people like me pointing out your bigotry if you insist certain classes of people can’t be ‘married’, but I’m sure you can bear up under the hardship like a martyr. Your approval is worth nothing compared to the actuality of denying the legal commitment and the name for it – marriage – to a whole class of people.

        If YOU are so hung up on the word itself and have religious objections to sharing the word ‘marriage’ why don’t you call it something different when it’s done in your church? Jesus never said the phonemes /ˈmarij/ when he meant the concept of ‘marriage’ after all. I’m sure you know Jesus didn’t speak English! Why not use a word in the Biblical language of the New Testament and leave the phonemes and spelling of ‘marriage’ for the secular legal commitment part of it that we’d all still share and that you say you approve of even for same-sex pairings?

        “Marriage”, after all, is a common English word also used in other contexts and not a religious word that only Christians are exclusively entitled to use. Does your commitment to the conservative view of ‘small government’ extend beyond mandating a morality police, who must supervise our sex lives and health care choices, into also mandating a metaphor police to make sure no one uses the word ‘marriage’ in any other context besides a one man/one woman legal ceremony? “To hell with you, William Blake!” is your rallying cry. “We conservatives are editing the title and contents of your poem, “The Marriage of Heaven and Hell” to “The Partnership Agreement of Heaven and Hell” because the cited parties in the poem do not conform to our one man/one woman definition of marriage, which, as we have asserted using our Biblical authority, is the ONLY correct usage allowed for the word ‘marriage.’ If we allow this travesty of the usage if the word ‘marriage’ to pass, William Blake and his poem are trampling on our religious rights!”

        If you think that’s ridiculous, you should not object to either using the word ‘marriage’ to mean ‘marriage’ for everyone, or, if you must distance yourself from it or feel trampled upon, isn’t it your responsibility to adopt a new religious-exclusive word that means ‘a Christian approved one man/one woman religious commitment ceremony.’ Of course, if you used a Greek Biblical word for it, you’d have that same problem; of it being a common word used in other contexts. Hmm, you’d have the problem regardless of the language you chose, even Aramaic, if you think Greek isn’t ‘authentically Jesus-y enough.’ Maybe you could make up pray to god for a suitably unique word, and try to sell it to your fellow conservatives on your revealed authority. You’ve already asserted that you have revealed authority from god to define words for everyone, right? Every conservative ought to recognize whatever word god gives you as being authentic and from God himself! No? Or maybe go ask someone with a talent for glossolalia to channel what god wants the religious part of your legal marriage to be called? At least, then, it wouldn’t be an English word.

      • naviathan

        You are truly delusional and you can’t seem to make your point without throwing personal insults. You call me bigoted yet you have no respect for my beliefs. This whole page is nothing but baseless insult after baseless insult. To parody your sarcastic rant, fine why don’t we just call the union of homosexuals marriage even though the Bible makes it a point to single out how egregious that sin is in the eyes of God. And while we’re at it we’ll burn the crosses in front every church so as not to offend any atheists that may pass by, then lets just burn the Bibles and anything related because Lord knows you, yes specifically you, won’t be happy until religion is completely wiped from the face of the Earth.

        You ignorant, self entitled, uptight, sorry excuse for a human being. My intent in life is to live as close to a Christian life as I can, which entails morals and principals. Your intent is obviously to “enlighten” me and the rest of the religious world into accepting your baseless screwed up way of life. I’d say go to hell, but whether you believe in it or not, you’re heading there anyway. Part of the beauty of the whole thing is that you don’t have to believe in God, it doesn’t change the fact that he’s still there or the fact that your actions will eventually result in your confinement to a place you couldn’t even imagine.

      • Carol Lynn

        Poor Naviathan – Are you watching Cosmos? The world is so much more than your Bible imagined. Of course, if you respected facts and evidence and didn’t assume that your worldview is religiously privileged over any other, you might be able to carry on a reasonable debate without resorting to threats of eternal punishment for your opponents when you are clearly losing, not just here, but also in the realm of general public opinion.

        Didn’t you get the memo that True Christians™ don’t pull out the hell card anymore? Even True Christians™ admit these days that hell is a poorly written sado-masochistic fantasy suitable only for cowing little minds – unless it’s a metaphor. Either way, it’s so not done to threaten people with hell! Aren’t you worried that the True Christians™ are going to come and take away your Christian card?

        Do you worry that you will be sent to Mordor if you don’t bow to Sauron? Or that Voldemort’s Death-eaters are coming for you? Or that Santa won’t leave you presents if you are ‘bad’? That’s how much I care about hell, which is to say, not at all.

        That you have ‘beliefs’ does not entitle them to respect. You seem to have no problem with disrespecting any beliefs that I espouse and threatening me with eternal torture on top of the disrespect!

        As far as I am concerned, you may hold and practice whatever beliefs you wish. I think they are misguided beliefs and I have the right to try and show you where they are wrong – and my disapproval will take the form of pointing and laughing if you continue to hold them in the face all evidence, not threats of torture – but you are absolutely entitled to hold them. I am completely opposed to burning crosses anywhere, or curtailing anyone’s civil liberties – even if if it hurts your fee-fees to recognize that everyone is entitled to the same rights you have, for example, to call themselves ‘married’ – and you are welcome to have as many religious symbols as you like on private property. You can even flaunt swastikas, or John Galt Lives! flags, or 10 Commandments monuments, or whatever suits you, as far as I care as long as you limit to being on your own property. It is only when you insist that your beliefs MUST be legislated for or kow-towed to in the public sphere that we clash at all. According to the Constitution, government must remain secular, that is neutral in respect to any establishment of any religion or even a lack of religious beliefs. I am no more in favor of anyone supporting religious beliefs in the public sphere than I am of insisting that my atheism be forced into law by banning churches or curtailing private religious expression.

        Rather than being a good, libertarian, conservative, you are being very un-American and certainly are working against the wishes of the “founding fathers” when you support anyone trying to legislate religious rules into law. Did you drink Barton’s kool-aid while you were reading Atlas Shrugged? (oh dear, more snark again. Can his fee-fees stand the strain?)

        And you still for some reason are unable to produce the name of even ONE of those myriad of conservative abolitionists you swore existed and have resorted to threats of hell to ‘keep me in my place’ and distract the conversation from the lack of coherence in your arguments.

        My intent in life is to live as close to a Christian life as I can, which entails morals and principals.

        What a weird definition of Christian morals and principals you have. Turned the other cheek much lately? Been humble? Washed the feet of the contagious? Helped the less-accepted be a more integrated part of society? Gave away all your wordily goods? Did all your praying and worshipping in private?

        You seem like a typical religious conservative. Full of fury, signifying nothing.

      • naviathan

        See, you prove my points over and over again.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        actually she proves her points.
        we don’t care what anyone believes—————–
        we get pissed off when OTHERS want/demand/claim that they MUST be followed exclusively.

        that my ‘friend’……is insanity and elitism at its FINEST

      • naviathan

        Lets see,
        “hipppppp—–ooooo— crit(e)” yes I added the “e” because I can spell.

        We’re in America, no one here can or is demanding that anyone follow anyone else exclusively. You all ridiculous.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        hey brainiac————–
        I ‘spelled’ it PHONETICALLY
        tea party evangelical white trash CHRISTIANS are demanding ( through attempted intrusion in state and local legislations) that their F*CKING VOODOO– and arcane & superstitious “beliefs” be followed.
        Im ridiculous? dammmmmmmned right
        (NOTE: the proper English syntax would’ve been ” you are ridiculous” ,,,,)

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        bytheway—-the F*CKING book of superstition ( BIBLE) also says women are to be killed ( stoned) when they enter marriage ( that “sacred” institution U cry about) not virginal….. do U eat shellfish? do U wear certain “poly” fabrics???? that idiot book( does have some good; some idiotic) is held by U non thinkers as PERFECT. ANYONE who knows anything KNOWS that the ONLY” perfection” is death. OHWAIT— josephs wife had a baby that wasn’t his and he stayed?? back then? suuuuuure——- andandand— MY fave? “10 commandments” says using GODs name in vain is mortal sin,,,,but does NOT mention rape???
        great anthology….. atavistic and outdated; full of VOODOO and encourages violence. Jesus was a very sharp jewish man who found something that worked so well for him that he was killed for his beliefs. Many have died the same way- for individual causes. yet ( of COURSE) you and your lemmings are 100% correct/ all others going to hell?
        great religion,,,, pass the tithing ( tax free ) basket

      • naviathan

        Now who’s the hypocrite? Most of the garbage you just spewed is from the old testament, the new covenant cast out much of old sacrifices and violence. Now you’re really being ignorant and rude. Typical Liberal, starts throwing insults when he can’t prove his point.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        sooooooooooo—————- u are a ‘constitutionalist? that’s actually somewhat nice!!!! OK! maybe U can explain wy creeps with that moniker –so ” constitutional” — are trying to destroy at least 2 constitutional laws? ( and maybe 3 as they are trying to eviscerate the 14th amendment) ….if U believe in “smaller ” govt they where were you white trash regressives when BUSH made our GOVT huge? and spent a surplus into a debt? and U love smaller (??) govt? then WHY whyWHY do U love HUGE power in the state governments regarding abortion and crushing unions and keeping wages suppressed? ( among many other BIG state govt powers??)
        hipppppp—–ooooo— crit

      • naviathan

        See now you’re just being offensive and ignorant. I don’t agree with everything G.W. did. Much like Clinton, I believe he had his good points and his bad points. Clinton reduced the national debt, bravo. He also proved the POTUS could be sexy again…lol that was interesting to watch. Frankly I could care less if he smoked pot in college or even now. I really don’t care that he got a blow job in office. Good on him if he could pull it off. Most of his problem was trying to deny the things he did. That’s one thing with Obama, at least he’s honest about his past drug use, unfortunately that’s about where it stops. I don’t believe any government, Fed or state should be huge. I do believe something needs to be done about abortions though. They happen so often it’s almost like getting your tonsils removed and that’s how a lot of supporters of abortions treat it. It’s wrong. Two people conceived a life and they’re just going to toss it aside because it’s inconvenient?
        Wages…wages are a fun topic. Do you know what happens when you up the minimum wage? EVERYTHING becomes more expensive. Nothing effects the base price of all products more than minimum wage and fuel. You want to spur the economy and improve peoples living conditions, reduce the cost of fuel at the pump.
        You people keep calling me a hypocrite, yet the only things you can throw at me are stereotypes and ignorant rants. I can easily say the same thing about you.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        then explain why they fight against equal rights for all americans? ( gay marriage; stupid religious monkeysh*t),,,,,, they fight against equal pay ( lilly ledbedder act) for women ( see who voted against that),,,,,,they are PRO death penalty yet PRO life?? The LOUD Christian fools DO believe earth is only (?) 4000 yrs old. why do ” conservatives ” ( see: regressives) act so poorly when a republican idea ( aca/romneycare) is implemented by a democrat? why are “conservatives” so noisy about 4 dead in Benghazi yet so QUIET about 4400 PLUS dead ( and thousands maimed) from Iraq war? WHAT EXACTLY ARE THE conservatives ( see: regressives) CONSERVING????
        ………………….. let us know- willya?

      • naviathan

        Sure, you’re speaking of a large group of career politicians who hold no loyalties to their constituents or to the constitution they’ve sworn to uphold. Romneycare and the ACA are both horrible ideas. They expand the reach, scope and power of the government, either one, well beyond where they should. Romneycare is easy enough to see how it was implemented. Frankly, if I lived in that state I would have moved. The Constitution gives power not explicitly provided the Fed to the state. So, sadly Romneycare is Constitutional, the ACA is not.
        Marriage is the problem with Gay Marriage. It’s more of a terminology/principal issue. They’ve taken something that is sacred to us they’re using it for something that is not just wrong, but so much so that it was explicitly listed among the worst of the sins in the bible. If the LGBT community wants the same rights and privileges under the law as a heterosexual couple, that’s fine, but don’t call it marriage, that is sacred to us.
        Not all conservatives are womanizing philanthropists. Just like the Democrats have their boatload of career idiots, so does the Republican party. I’d love to clean house with all of them. This is why I support term limits on congressmen and women.
        There is a huge difference between the death penalty and abortion. There’s an alternative to abortion, its called adoption. The alternative to serial killers on death row is the U.S. taxpayer supporting a former member of society that will never be reintegrated or productive again. Do you really think it’s worth filling jails and supporting these murderers for their entire lives? For what? They’re never going to get out, unless they break out or are for some reason pardoned.
        Yes, there are a lot of loud Christians who, much like the Catholics of old, can’t bring themselves to see that the age of the Earth does not disprove the word of God.
        We’re pissed about Benghazi because the Whitehouse was warned well in advance, they ignored the warnings, then thy denied the extra security, then they flat out lied about it for weeks after they knew what really happened. The Iraq war should not have run as long as it did. I won’t delve into whether or not we should have gone in, but suffice it to say, that regardless the intentions, the people of Iraq were grateful for the most part. Some bad eggs made some stupid moves and some crappy politicians on both sides kept it running. I was there, I saw the destruction, but I also saw the people who were better off for us being there. Afghanistan is a different fight. Rougher terrain, more difficult to move in and I’m honestly not sure what the end goal even is there. The time to pull back has come and gone.
        You are again confusing conservatives (which has nothing to do with regressing) with Republicans. There are more conservative parties than just the Republicans. Republicans rank very low on my scale at the moment and anyone who has made a career out of politics needs to go, I don’t care who they are or what side they’re on. Traditionally, you served your constituents in DC for a time, it was an honor to do and when you were done you went back to your job, business, farm and someone else took a turn. This lessened the risk of corruption over time and brought in new ideas and fresh perspectives at regular intervals.
        This current government needs to end, no matter what that means at this point.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        not bad,,,,,,,,,,,,,but U still are a cavity in my mouth here—- if homosexuality is SOOOOOO bad and nasty ( note: im straight) then WHY it NOT mentioned in those infertile 10 commandments???
        killing really bad guys is ok; but how many of those killed were innocent? don’t know? me neither– but If I was one –or YOU were one we would know of at least one

      • Carol Lynn

        You still think you have the right to legislate your – and only your – views of things into laws for all us. I don’t think anyone ought to care that you think the word “marriage” is too sacred to share with everyone who wants to get married. Part of living in a pluralistic society is that we all have to ignore some things that annoy us.

        You have this weird view that nine months of pregnancy and the resulting birth is equivalent to a hangnail on the medical scale; that it’s never any problem at all for any woman so of course they should all be happy to have you legislate adoption instead of abortion for them. Do you think there are no children in the foster care system now because they’ve all found parents? Would conservatives be willing to pay the taxes that would be needed to support and educate all the unadopted children that would be left over in your scheme?

        As I understand it, conservatives have individual freedom as one of their standards. So why do you feel you have the right to legislate a limit to people’s personal choices so that they cannot differ from your choices? I think ‘freedom’ loses it’s meaning if there is only a dictated choice available, especially if the dictated option is something a person would not choose to do if they could do otherwise.

      • naviathan

        And you call us closed minded. You have got to be the most bigoted, arrogant, thoughtless being on the face of this planet. If you don’t want to go through the pain of childbirth, don’t get pregnant. Everything has consequences in this world and it doesn’t matter how liberal and self entitled you are, you will face them just like everyone else. You do realize that the “fetus” isn’t just tissue right? It’s not mindless and unfeeling. They have proven time and again that the baby feels every pull tearing its limbs from its body. Many of them attempt move away from the forceps. Maybe if you had to sit down and watch some of the abortions from the inside you would understand a little better. Not that you would care of course. Then there’s late term abortions, which are even more horrendous and undeniably a human child. Of course that’s ok too because the “fetus” wasn’t born yet so its still not human in your eyes. Of course I still don’t see the difference between a baby that’s viable for C-section birth and a “fetus” thats still able to be a late term abortion.
        Abortion is disgusting, it’s barbaric and just plain wrong. But that’s ok as long as it doesn’t screw up your life or anything right? As long as you don’t have to be inconvenienced any, who cares?
        Yet somehow in this twisted little world of ours you think conservatives are heartless and evil because we believe in the right to bear arms. Because somehow in your world guns kill hundreds of children everyday in the U.S.. Somehow legal gun owners are responsible for all the shootings in the streets by thugs with illegal guns. You’re just as mentally screwed up as you claim conservatives are. I’m not a politician so I’m not trying to legislate my views on anyone. What I would like to legislate is some discretion and basic human morality, but that’s not my place. However it’s also not my responsibility or that of our government to pay for the thousands of abortions that happen across this country every day. Yes day. The U.S. accounts for roughly 3,000 abortions a day. Statics show that 22% of pregnancies in the U.S. end in abortion every year. That’s a disgusting figure by any measure don’t you think?

        But I digress. I wasn’t even going to post back in this thread, but you insist on trying to prove that somehow I’m the bad guy here simply because I’m a conservative. Do some research, stop going by the party line bullshit and make some real decisions for yourself. You might find that your actual views fall somewhere in between the party line rhetoric just like the rest of us. You want to lump all conservatives into one far right extremist group, but the reality is no one is that extreme unless they’re so stupid and gullible they believe everything on Fox News. I’m sure you liberals probably feel the same way. I can’t imagine that every one of you is just as stupid as Feinstein proves herself to be every day. Good luck, and remember, in the end we’re all Americans and all this infighting does nothing for our country.

      • Carol Lynn

        I went back and reread the OP. Yep. Alan was right. Conservatives are terrible at this human interaction and change thing. Thank you, naviathan, so much for being such a perfect illustration of Alan’s point.

      • $80856350

        Nonsense. There was nothing “conservative” about the abolitionist movement. It was Southern “conservatives” and their Copperhead supporters in the North who maintained support for the “peculiar institution” that drove the southern agricultural economy.

        Those same Southern conservatives hated the Republicans all the way up to the 1960’s, when the Democratic Party worked with moderate Northern Republicans to pass civil rights laws like the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. The “states rights Republicans” headed by Goldwater (who opposed the Civil Rights Act) recognized their opportunity to roll the scared whites of the South, which is where Nixon was able to channel those same racial resentments into his winning “Southern Strategy.”

        Once the Republicans became the party standing against the expansion of civil rights for blacks and other minorities, the former “Southern Democrats” flowed across into the Republican party just like flies to a dung pile.

        The only thing with any “dribble” on it is your chin.

      • naviathan

        This is the garbage Democrats and Liberals tell people to convince them that conservatives are racist. The only parties propagating racism in this country are Liberals and Democrats. Racism would be all but eliminated if it wasn’t for this race baiting rhetoric that anyone with half a brain can see is just to keep party lines drawn and ignorant voters on one side.

      • $80856350

        That may be one of the most delusional posts on this entire thread. I suppose you’re also going to tell us that there was nothing racist about slavery and that the slaves were treated well by their owners, right?

      • naviathan

        And that right there is just asinine. You can’t even argue your point without turning to extremist remarks. You only prove my point.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        do U think this closed minded lemming will listen???? naviathan follows a dried out carpenter; calls him “GOD” and pays to do so

      • $80856350

        There’s no point in attempting logical argument with someone claiming that the group most responsible for asserting the basic civil rights claims of minority groups is more racist than the party representing the most vile traditions and tendencies of the old Confederacy. Republicans have become nothing more than a rump party of the old South, dedicated to preserving the privileges of the wealthy elite in return for their scraps as long as they have some groups of people they can continue to believe are inferior.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        visit Mississippi and Tennessee and Alabama
        ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, let me know what they are like– the white trash “Christians”

      • 2Smart2bGOP

        Wow – I don’t know anyone who still believes that. I always feel a little sorry for those people who still don’t understand that over the last 150 years, the parties essentially switched. Even St Ronnie wasn’t conservative enough to get elected today.

      • naviathan

        And what exactly is “conservative enough” and what would you even know about it? You obviously aren’t a conservative, you believe the bullshit line that the parties switched sides over the the last 150 years and you’re too blind to see that Conservative and Liberal doesn’t mean just Democrat and Republican. The parties didn’t switch sides, the Democrats just figured out that their original tactics weren’t working anymore in a moral society. So they shifted to a “progressive movement” of propaganda and race baiting. Too bad for people like you that haven’t noticed the only thing Democrats have done so far is expand government power, maintain racism in America, and bleed the American people dry. We were once a prosperous country, before our government became the largest employer.

      • 2Smart2bGOP

        Hee, hee, hee….boy, doesn’t take much to set you off, does it? You’re right, I’m obviously NOT a conservative; I consider that term an insult, since you guys are really bad at “conserving” anything. But see, in order to insult me, I must first care at all about what you think. Nice try, though.
        The Republican party is fractured and dying. You just don’t realize it yet.

      • naviathan

        You’re right, the Republican party is fractured and dying. That’s why I’m not a Republican. It’s a shell of formerly great political party.

      • moe/larry & curly keys


      • naviathan

        Liberal Dolt…See! I can call people names too! Now lets go play on the swing set like good kindergartners.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        whig is an aspersion? seems U didn’t progress ( dontcha hate that word) past kindergarten in American history
        ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, send me more lachrymose verbosity

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        yeah,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and all of U aging white trash didn’t say a word until a black president was elected

      • naviathan

        Oh we’ve been speaking out for years. Nobody could hear us over the other bullshit. It wasn’t until Obama took office and threw the New World Order into overdrive. Now anyone who opposes this tyrannical crap is a racist? Sure, that makes perfect sense. Of course if we offer up our list of Black Americans that we would vote for you’ll call them all “Uncle Toms” because somehow that isn’t racist at all. It’s ok though, we know who the racists are, and trust me, in general it’s not us.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        sorry— tea party formed ( supposedly) from the ‘ashes’ of the failed ron paul campaign.
        2008,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, look it up before U cry back

  • Tom Erickson

    I would say that many of the Conservatives are really Elitists that want to control power and use the CPAC to drive people to support them. I heard it stated that the Republican party is made up of a group that is less educated AND a group that is very wealthy. This makes me think that the Rich want to get richer by forcing the not-so-educated into a position of following. It is very hard to understand how We The People can ever have Liberty.

  • Edward Krebbs

    I live in a small Midwestern town in a rural area. A few decades ago, the town lost its major employer when a factory that glued things together (that is, very low skills and education needed for workers) closed down. The one good thing was it provided a regular paycheck and paid a little above minimum wage.

    I am continuously amazed at the extreme conservative mindset that extends to the economic salvation of the time is to attract another similar small factory. The conservative mindset has no thought that unskilled labor is automated and/or shipped overseas. The conservative mindset is that you didn’t need education to work in the factory. etc. etc. At the same time, people detest any measure to improve the town.

    Likewise, like every other small town in similar situations, they have an economic board whose job is to try to attract businesses to town. They do the same thing as other economic boards, go to the same meetings, use the same tactics.

    Conservatism’s finest.

    • Gary Menten

      Frederick Douglass taught that literacy is the path from slavery to freedom. There are many kinds of slavery and many kinds of freedom, but reading is still the path.”

      Carl Sagan

  • Shaun Kirkwood

    “The only thing that stays the same is the fact things constantly change…”

  • Gabriel Gentile

    “I just don’t get why anyone would want to call themselves a “conservative.””

    Because many people define their identity by that which they choose to oppose and from which they choose to differentiate themselves.

    It’s called the human condition.


  • FD Brian

    If it was left to conservatives, Elvis would never have been on TV

  • Gina Marie

    Carol Lynn, I am horrified at your finger pointing and insults at a fellow American. You are basically creating a hyperbole here. Racist hates someone of a different color, and you obviously hate someone of different beliefs. How is that any different? Being conservative does NOT mean you are a republican. In fact, the republican party is SO FAR NOT conservative that i don’t see why you even bring them into this conversation.

    What kind of progression are you talking about that conservatives are so against? The ACA? The ending of the IRS? Taking away our second amendment rights? Or how about our 1st amendment rights? How about that GIANT deficit we have somehow gained over the last 5 years. Sure, Bush had brought it up to about what, 6, 7 trillion? But since then we are now at almost 17 trillion. That is approximately 10 trillion more, and more than ALL of the presidents combined from Washington to Bush. How is that good for our future? Our childrens future?

    Gay marriage, go for it. Abortion, I’m not a fan, but it wouldn’t be on me, because I would never have one. So by all means. Religion? I don’t care what you believe, i have my beliefs and im not gonna force them on you. You can believe whatever you want.

    What I’m angry about is being lied to by the current administration numerous times, a congress that just doesn’t do its job, lobbyists pushing issues (where there is always money to be had) and Washington DC living in a bubble, where they have NO idea what it’s like to be a normal middle class citizen, having to work regular 40 hour weeks. How can we be governed by those that have no clue who we are? What we go through everyday?

    Carol Lynn, I do not fear change, but I fear what is changing that we don’t know about. Come on. Can you deny that Nancy Pelosi said, “You have to pass it to see whats in it”….. What the heck is that? No one had a clue! If that can be done what else can be done?

    I just can’t believe how naive you are being on everything around you. Ted Cruz did exactly what his constituents wanted, which is HIS JOB. WE DO NOT WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT. THE GOVERNMENT WORKS FOR US. Some how that has become some kind of warped idea that has flipped. The same folks that are conservatives now are NOT the same conservatives that had anything to do with what happened 60 years ago, 40 years ago, whatever! So stop using that as an excuse to call them such awful things. Other countries STILL HAVE SLAVERY. STILL TREAT WOMEN AS IF THEY WERE DOGS. Look at our country! We have come far. And both conservatives and liberals were right there…. as it happened… they may not have agreed, but they got it done.

    So let us focus on today. Let us focus on working TOGETHER and quit pointing fingers. I’m so sick of it. Lets just agree to disagree, get on with our lives, vote as our duty as Americans, and stand for what we believe in, without such name calling and finger pointing. That is all.